Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1886-02-09
MIR. Blaine on the Fisheries CUES
ton.


Mr.. Blane's forthcoming volume has a
chapter on the question of the Fisheries,
which has been published in the New York
Tribune and Boston Journal. 1t is a very
interesting, valuable, timely and complete
statement of the fisheries question from 1882,
when the first treaty with Great Britain was
made. down to the completion of the last
treaty with that government upon this matter.
The Boston Journal editorially publishes the
following abstract of the paper:
The facts which Mr.. Blaine brings out are
full Of interest. The first treaty between
the Colonies and Great Britain after the close
Of the Revolution, that of 1882, conferred
upon American fishermen the same right to
take fish in Canadian waters which they had
while they were British subjects. This right
was not questioned by the British government
after the war of 1912. In 1918 treaty was
negotiated in which the right of American
fishermen to fish within three miles of the Ca
madam shores was renounced without the re-
quest of the British negOtators. 1t would have
been of no consequence but for the growth of
the mackerel fisheries. When these fisheries
became valuable, the irritation growing out
Of the three-mile limit led to the negotiation
of the so-called Reciprocity Treaty in 1854.
which was based on the claim of the British
authorities to the inshore Canadian fisheries.
In that treaty Canada secured our free mar
kets for everything she had to sell and ep-
ened hers to everything which we had no &C.
casion to sell. This treaty expired in 1866
This treaty being no longer in force, we got
along with the treaty of 1918 uptil the Treaty
of Washington was ratified. In this treaty,
so far as the fisheries we're concerned, Great
Britain, by superior diplomacy and chcanery,
got q great advantage. The British plenipo-
tentiaries in the High Joint Commission
maintained that the Canadian fisheries were
worth more to the United States than the
free market in this country for Cana
dian fishermen. Our representatives claimed
that this was not the case, but when the arti-
Gle was drawn it was left to another commits
sion to state the amount of money which the
Canadian fisheries were worth to the United
States in excess of the privilege of our mar
kets. They also secured wording of the ar
ticle which made the decree o! majority Of
the commission binding By delays and d.
plomatic ingenuity, the British government
secured the appointment of third man on
the commission which made the Halifax
award who was Objectionable to our govern
After that award was made the United States
Senate made it known that this country re-
grrded the Halifax award as an unjust one,
and Secretary Evarts presented the British
government the whole argument against
the award. He called attention to the
statistics, which showed that during the
five seasons which the treaty had been in
force l25, 96l barrels of mackerel and been
caught in Canadian waters, the market price
of which was about S25 900 year, or $780,
600 for the twelve years, for which the United
States paid So 100000 by the Halifax award
and 81 200,000 in duties RENTED, thereby
losing 80, 100000 in twelve years by that
treaty, thus, by concession and that species
of diplomacy which may well be termed
chicanery, during hundred years our Gov
eminent has come to q situation where it
must pay large sum for rights which once
belonged to it and which are now of little or
no commercial value. After reading Mr.
Blaine's chapter of history respecting the
fisheries. no wonder thot the fishermen of the
United States have come to regard commits
sion on thic subject as another name for a
board designed to dispose of their rights to
barter away their industry.