Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1886-12-09

Daodeck- Z. b., ana DAVID j. Adams at An
napolis Basin, n. s., although the seizures
took place in land locked harbors and no in
vasion of territorial waters of the Briti.h
Provinces for fishing could well be imagined
He said they appear to be based on such act
or intent. The United States does not hesi-
tate TO warm American citizens against tax
ing. drying or curing fishing within the three
mile limit prescribed by the treaty of 1918
Since 1918, however, various regulations
have sprung up and contributed toward more
intimate Intercourse and beneficial traffic be-
tween the United States and the Brisish
Provinces These regulations not always
have been reciprocated by the Provinces ;
they depend to a certain extent on the munic-
ipal States on the discretionary powers of the
executive hereunder. The seizure of the
vessels referred TO would seem TO have been
made under the supposed dele egation of iuris-
diction by the imperial government of Great
Britain ard TO be intended to include author
ity to interpret and enforce the provisions of
the treaty of 1918 to which, as | have re-
ma ked, the United S stes and Great Britain
are the contracting parties. who can alone
deal respOnsiblv with the questions arising
Hereunder. The effects of this colonial leg
islation and executive Interpretation, if exc
cuted according to letter. would be only to
treaty of 1918 which related solely to inshore
fishery within the three mile limit SO as to
affect deep sea fisheries. right TO which re-
mained unquestioned and unimpaired for the
enjoyment of the citizens of the United
States. But further 10 diminish and prac-
tically to destroy the privileges expressly Sc
cured TO American fishing vessels TO visit in
shore waters for objects of shelter, repair of
damages and purchasing wood and obtaining
water, Bayard says. so many changes in fish,
ing taken since 1918. restri tions against OBJ
tanning bail, etc., are now unnecessary.
The secretary asks, therefore, why the U.
S. vessels engaged in deep sea fishing should
not be given the same rights and privileges
in the ports of British colonies as are now
allowed British vessels in all ports of the
United States. Among these customary
rights and privileges may be enumerated the
purchaS sof ship supplies of every nature,
making repairs. shipment of crews in whole
| or in part, and the purchase of ice aud bait
for use in deep sea fishing.
The question then arises, how the treaty
Of 1918, made to protect the inshore fishery
along the British American coast, can be dis
torted 10 obstruct the business of deep sea
fishing by the citizens OF the United States,
of interrupting and destroying the CONNER
cial intercourse that since the treaty of 1918
and independent of any treaty Whatever, has
grown up and now exists under the concur
rent and friendly law and mercantile regula-
tions of the respective countries.
In making these suggestions, Secretary
Bayard says he does not wish to prejudice
cases. or seem to desire to shield any Ameri
can vessel from the consequences of viola
tions of the international obligation. 1t is
obviously essential, he says, that the admin
jstration of laws regulating the Canadial in
shore fishing should not be conducted in a
primitive and hostile spirit which can only
tend to induce acts of a retaliatory nature.
The Secretary wrote second letter May
Goth to bring Minister Vests attention to
further information received from the u. 5.
consul general at Halifax in regard to the
seizure of the David j. Adams. He speaks
of the state of affairs between Great Britain
and the United States in 1870, when some
International questions were under considera-
ton and decision was then reached that no
vessel could be seized unless it could be
clearly proved that the otfense of fishing was
committed and the vessel itself captured with
in three miles of land.
Letters dated May % and 30 followed from
Bayard, the last calling attention to the bill
pending in the Canadian Parliament for a
more strict observance and enforcement of
the fishery regulations. Bavard also refers
to the circulars purporting to be from the
customs department at Ottawa, assuming to
execute the provisions of the treaty of 1918,
and to "warning" of similar tenor, said to
have been issued by Geo. +. Foster, minister
of marine and fisheries, dated Ottawa, Oct. 5,
1886, Bayard says "Such proceedings | con-
ceive to be flsgrantly vioative of the recipro-
cal commercial privileges to which the citi-
zens of the United States are lawfully enti-
tied under the statutes of Great Britain and
well defined and publicly proclaimed author
ity of both countries, besides being in res
pect of the existing conventions between the
two countries, and assumption of jurisdiction
entirely unwarranted and which is wholly de-
MED by the U. S."
The secretary writes to the minister that
he has instructed Minister Phelps at London
to give notice that the government of Great
Britain will be held liable for all losses and
injuries to citizens of the United States and
their property, caused bv unauthorized and
unfriendly action of Canadian officials
June ID, Secretary Bayard informs Minis
ter West that complaint has been made to
him by member of Congress from Maine,
that Canadian collector of customs threat
ened to seize American boats seeking to buy
herring taken in the Dominion weirs for can
ming.
On June I, the secretary protests to Min
;ster West against the seizure at st. An
| drews, n. b., of the Annie Jordan.
| Again on June l4th, he writes, touching
the allegations that American vessels would
not be allowed to land fish at Halifax fol
transportation across the provinces and Amer
lean vessel. have been warned to keep out
eide of the line drawn from headland tC
headland.
He says in conclusion, referring to tht
seizure of the Getty of Portland" at Shell
burne, n. s., Secretary Bayard writes, July
2nd: 1.-The act as is reported is an infringe
ment of the ordinary rights of international
hospitality and constitutes violation OF
treaty stipulations and commercial priv
ileges."
| On July 20. Secretary Bsyard refers to the
failure of the British authorities to answer
his telegram relative to herring fishery anC
adds that he ha. been informed by Repres'
entative Boutelle that American boats have
been driven away from st. Andrews.
| On the same day the secretary writes tc
Minister West informing him of the refusal
| of the Canadian authorities to allow Ameri
can vessels to obtain ice and ship fish in bond
to the United States at Picton, n. s., and
enters protest.
| Earl Rosebery,i in letter to Minister Wes'
dated July %, says the whole fishery question
! involves the gravest interests of Canada. He
declines to discuss the competence of Cana
dian officials in seizing American vessels till
| the Canadian courts have given judgment in
the seizure cases. Earl Roseberry send Sec.