New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1886-01-02
IMPR4CHMEYr SUGGESTED.

Secretary Bayard's policy with reference to
the fisheries has met with destructive criticism
from a prominent Eastern Democrat. The
fishing clauses of the Treaty of Washington
were abrogated by joint resolution passed by
Congress on March 3, 1888. BY the termina-
ton of these clauses the rights of American
fishermen in Provincial waters would naturally
have reverted On July 1, 1885, to the treaty OF
1918, which had been prolific source of inter
national dispute in the past. Secretary Bayard,
lnrcd by an ingenious letter from that shilful
diplomatist, Mr.. West was entrappcd into an
agreement by which the will of Congress WAS
virtually nullilied. by diplomatic arrange
mcnt between the State Department and the
British Minister, the clauses which Congress
had abrOgatcd were extended from JAY | to
January /, with the understanding that the
Administration should recommend the appoint
ment of joint com mission to be charged with
the settlement of the entire question Of the fish
ing rights Of the two countries. This recon-
mcndaton was made in due time in the PTesi-
dents Message as Mr.. West had suggested,
aud fishing during the last six months has been
uninterrupted and practically regulated by the
clauses which Congress had aDrogated. These
are the facts. We shall row briefly summarize
the judgment of leading export aud uncom-
promising Democrat on the Governments
policy.
The Hon. Il. :. Spoiford. who was the Dem
ocratIc candidate for Congress in the Essex
(Massachusctt>) District in 1881, pronounccs
it no instance Of usurpaton in olitsc wen nigh
demanding the penalty of impeachment. lie
does not lay stress upon the SccIctary's irreS-
ulnr action in committing the Administrations
mt the bchrst of a foreign Power, TO pre-
determined course He is even go lenient as 10
admit that possibly the Administration acted
within it, constitutional right in prolOnging the
effect of the clauses which Congress had abro-
gated. But he distinctly charges the Secretary
with arrogating To himself the exercise OF
powers neither delegated to his department nor
10 the Executive branch of the Government.
The ground for this grave accusation Is the fact
that the Secretary has guaranteed lmpunty to
British subjects engaged in fishing within the
maritime jurisdiction OF the United States,
without any authority of law or public right
whatever. The evidence in support of tins
charge is furnished by the diplomatic CORE
spondcnce. Alr. West having called the Secre
tary's attention to the fact that while the
Colonial Governments had been asked 10
guarantee immunity from interference with
American vessels in Canadian waters, similar
had not been conceded to Canadian
vessels in American waters, Nr. Bayard replied
" understand also that the same immunity
" which is accorded by this agreement to the
q vessels belonging to the citizens of the United
" Sta,cs engaged in fishing in British American
" waters will be extended to the British vessels
" and subjects engaged in fishing in the waters
" Of the United States
II view of these facts Mr.. SpOilord dclibcr-
ately charges Secretary Bayard with offending
the sovereignty of the United States bv
attempting to deed away maritime ri ghts and
to guarantee immunity for their violation by
foreigners. He pronounces the Secrctary's
action to be without the slightest warrant of
law, and without the participation of the
Senate. He considers the whole transaction
rs well rs the agreement that the Government
should forfeit its freedom of action and be
bound to pursue particular policy mt a future |
day, public scandal, and sententiOusly re-
marks: For offences less griev)us against the |
I" majesty of the State there are not wanting |
I" prccedrnts for Impeachment in the parlia.
- mcntary journals both of Great Britain and the /
= United States"
We respectfully direct the attention of Con-
grcss to this indictment of the State Depart |
ment framed by II Democratic leader of con-
spicuous ability and established reputation. If
the Administration has exceeded its consti
tutional rights, nullled the action of Congress
and sacrificed the sovereignty of the United .
States in giving away maritime rights it should
be called to account for so grave INSIDE
nean0r 1t is pad enough to have the British
Minister making an easy dupe OF the State
Department and debating passages of the Pres
dents Message. But n direct usurpation of
power and an unconstitutional suspension of
maritime rights are offences of the gravest
nature which cannot be passed over in silence.
:, ILL., ,,, ,,,,. ooa,, IN ms, ~,