New-York tribune., 1886-01-19
CRITICISING Mr.. BAYARD.
HOW FISHERMEN HAVE BEEN PROTECTED.

HOW FISHERMEN HAVE BEEN PROTECTED.
SERIOUS OBJECTIONS TO THE AGREEMENT REGARD
ING THE FISHERIES
WAsu;NGroN Jan. IS (SpecidD. D.-Secretary Bayards
pocy was criticised in the Senate to-day His course
in entering into agreement with Great Brian
regarding the sheries question: without the advice OF
consent Of the Senate though that body was sitting at
the iIne was merclessly criticised by Mr.. Frye The
whole discussion out of resolutioG offered by
MI Frye which in effect stated that the Senate did
not favor the creation of commission Tor the seVe
ment Of gthe disputed fisheries question, as recon-
mended In the Presidents Message. Mr. Frye was not
going to make any remarks upon offering his resoln
lion. but Mr.. Edmuuds. who had been studying the
correspondence of Secretary Bayard with Mr. West,
which had lust been placed on the Senators desks,
called attention to the extraordinary on the
mart of the President i'll entering into what practically
amounted to a treaty with foreign government
will the participation of the Senate In his opinion
an important question had been raised by the Presi
dents action in this matter 1t would be well for tie
Senate 10 inquire into the Constitutional aspect OF the
case Had the prerogatves of the Senate been en-
CT cached uponl That was the bu den Of Nj.
EGmunds's remarks.
Mr. Frye followed this mp by giving a short sketch
of the negotiations the result of which had been that
for more than 100 years Great Britain bad reaped
advantages over American fishermen without giving
any adequate compensation to the United States IN
return The settlement with England at the end OF the
Revolutionary War was extremely favorable TO
American fishing interests The right to take fish, not
only on the Grand Banks aud ali other Banks OF New
foundland and in the Gulf OF ST. Lawrence but also
OH the coasts bays and creeks Ofhe British troVlnce
was recognized and secured TO the people OF the United
States without restriction limitation. This right
al afforf fha "
Treaty of Ghent neglected TO mention the fisheries
Great Britain hereupon began TO insist that the fish
ing rights conceded by the Treaty Of Independence no
longer existed. To settle the controversy the1reay
of 1918 entered into hch far less favorable
10 American fishermen. 1t renowned, on the part
of the United States. the risht.tO fish within three
marine miles of any of the coasts bays and har0ors OF
the British DOmiuions in North America" For mauy
years after the conclusion OF this treaty. the ght OF
American fshermen to fish in Canadian waters and
those of Newfoundland, outside of the three-mie
limit was questioned by England. 1t was only in
the forties that English dipomatss began to set up
the theory that the throe miles meant miles to be
measured fIom the headands at the entrance OF bays
and that American fishermen must not enter such rays
even it the fishing done at distance OF more than
three miles from shore. Numberless collisions between
the American fishing vessels and British cruisers were
the result ths interpret alton Of the treaty Ari
ttary arrests seizures oi property ana endless Haoh
followed.
name Tie advantages we're all on the SIDE OF the
provinces The United States derived not the slightest
benefit Further trouble ensued The situation becane
serious Some satisfactory settlement oi the whole
question seemed imperative. Inc resait oil lohg
negotiations on the part Of Great Britain ana the
United States the Washington treaty: IL gave 10
American fishermen the right TO fish III Caiiadlhn
waters In return the United States admitted iresh
fish from Canada free of duty accorded 10 Canadian
fishermen the privilege OF fishing III American waters
anu in The bargain paid So 5OU,UOO TO Great britain
end relinquished S9,OOO0OO IN duties lnder these
provisions OF the treaty, Mr. Frye ssid, Cahada bsa
added 800 vessels 10 its fishing heet auo over lOoU
TO its merchant marine, while the Lifted states had
saffered a corresponding loss in vessels and men, Inc
fishermen had not asked for continuation OF tne
treaty. They opposed TO IT. Not one hid re-
quesed Mr. Bayard or Congress TO renew H. YET upon
an int.mation merely from the British Minister the
Secretary Oi State had taken upon himself 10 prol1bg
rhe duration of that obnoxious treaty. And upon What
grounds On the ground that the abrupt termination
In the midst of the season. Of the fishing clause OF the
Treat, Of Washington would have resulted In serious
iDoonI eDiences and loss to American fishermen FROM
that resnlt an extension would protect then. Mr.
FRYE thought that American fishermen dld not want
any such protection. Great Britain had protected
American fishermen that way for more than lOO years
now, and the latter were tired OF tAst kmd OF pr9tee
ton. All they asked was TO be let alone lhey aont
want any more commissions. They don't want any
more negotiations They simply want the GoVern-
ment TO assert itself and defend It's rights In con-
clusiop, MIR Frve referred In stroug and emphatic
terms TO the outrage perpetrated by Great Britain III
selling eighty American fishing vessels and con
enning them the testimony Of witnesses standing
on shore who pretended 10 say that the vessels were
inside the three mile limit. " 1t is time, he SAID,
tor the United States to takes different course TO be
more eager in asserting her rights and more watchul
OF the interests of her people"
Both the Massaeh 1setts senators supported Mr. Frye
in the statement that OF their constituents had
asked extension during the last fishing season OF
the hsl ing clauses 10 the Washington Treaty.
Mr. Morgan, OF Alabama. attempted to defend Mr..
Bayards course by dwelling upon the ruinous effect
wbIeh an abrupt termination OF the treaty in the midst
OF the season would have had upon Amt rican fisher
men. lie also had great deal TO say about the hsh
having changed their ground. This, he said had
turned into provisions clauses in the treaty
which at the time they were negotiated, were
advantageous to the United States.
Bot to the former argument Mir. Dawes replied By
saving that the termination of the treaty was not
sudden at all On the CONTRARY, the heheEpen bad had
two years time ia which TO themselves Tor IT.
the joint resolution having passed Congress March g.
1883.
To the other argument Mr.. Frye replied by saying
that the trouble did not arise from the hsh hanging
their ground but from different methods employed in
making the catch After further talk Mr.. Fryes
resolution was referred to the Committee on Foreign
Relations 1t will no doubt lead to further discussion
I'm the Senate though the Democratic side
there seems be but few Senator'S disposed to engage
in y offence of Mr., Bayards course