New Ulm weekly review. [volume] (New Ulm, Minn.) 1878-1892, 1888-08-29

privilege of Transit for their exports and i'm
ports across our territory and to and from
OUT ports, tnough great in every aspect, will
De better appreciated when il is remembered
That for considerable portion of each year
the 81 Lawrence river. which constitutes the
direct avenue for commerce leading to Can
ada, is
CLOSED By ICE
during the last six years the imports and ex-
ports of British Canadian provinces carried
across our territory, under the privileges
granted bY our laws, amounted in value to
about $4,000, 600, nearly all of which
were goods dutiable under our tariff laws
BY Iar The largest part of This traffic consisted
OF exchanges of goods between Great Britain
and her American provinces brought to and
carried from our ports in their own vessels
Ihe treaty stipulation entered into by our
| government was in harmony with the laws
! which were then on. our statute book and
/ are still in force. recommend immediate
legislative action comforting upon the ex-
| ecut1ve the power to suspend by proclama-
| tlon the operation Of all laws and regula-
| Tons permitting the transit Of goods wares
| and merchandise in bond across or
over the territory of the United States
| to or from Canada There need be
no hesitation in suspending these laws
| arising from the superstition that
| their continuation ia secured by treaty obi
| cations. for 1T seems quite plain that article
| 70, OF the treaty of 1871, which was the
/ Why Sll oASiC luCO1 poLdu1DS SUCH laws, U0T-
| minated the LIST of July, 1885. The article
Itself declares thai provisions shall be in
force FOR the term of years mentioned in
| article 80 OF this treaty" Turning to article
81, we lind no mention of the 29th article,
| but only provision that articles Is to 25
| inclusive. and article 80 shall take effect as
| soon as the laws TO carry them into opera
taon shall be passed by the legislative bodies
| OF the different countries concerned, and
| that they shall remain in force for ten years
from the date at which they may come Vi %
| operation, and further, til the expiration
of two years after either of the high contract
| ing parties shall have given notice to the
other OF Its wish to terminate the same"
am OF the opinion that the ater1n of years
men toned in article So - referred to in arti-
Gle % as the limit of its duration, means the
period during which articles 1S to 25 in
elusive, and article 80, commonly called the
Fishery articles" should continue in force
under the language of said article SO. That
the joint high commissioners who negotiated
the treaty SO understood and intended the
phrase is certain. In statement containing
an account of their negotiations, prepared
under their supervision and approved by
them, we find the following entry on the
subject: 3The transit question was discussed,
and it was agreed that any settlement that
might be made should include a reciprocal
arrangement in that respect for the period
for which the fishery articles should be In
force" In addition 10 this very
SATISFACTORY EVIDENCE
supporting this construction of the language
of article %, it will be found that
the law passed by congress to carry the
treaty into effect furnishes conclusive proof
of the correctness of such construction. This
law was passed March 4, 1878, and is en-
titled IAN act to carry into effect the pro-
MISSIONS OF the treaty between the United
States and Great Britain, signed In Washing
ton, May 8, 1871, relating to the fisheries"
After providing in its first and second sec
tlons for putting in operation articles lS to
70, inclusive, and article 80 OF the treaty, the
third section is devoted to aeticle 20, as fol-
lows: Section 3. That from the date of the
presidents proclamation, authorized by the
hrst section OF this act, and so long as the
articles Ii to 25, inclusive, and article 80 OF
the said treaty shall remain in force
according to the terms and conditions of
article 80 of said treaty, all goods:
wares and merchandise arriving ETC., etc., )"
following in the remainder Of the section
the precise words of the stipulation on the
part of the United States as contained
in article 20, which | have already
fully quoted Here, then, is distinct enact
ment of the congress limiting the duration
OF this aruicle of the treaty to the time that
Articles lS to 20, inclusive, and article 30
should continue in force. That in fixing
such, imitation it but gave the meaning of
treaty itself, is indicated by the fact THAI its
purpose is declared to be to carry into effect
further fact that this law appears to have
been submitted before the PRONUNCIATION of
the treaty to certain members of the joint
nigh commission representing both countries
and met with no objection or dissent
There appearing to be no con
filct or inconsistency between the
treaty and the act of the congress
last cited, it is not necessary to invoke the
we'll settled principle that in case of such
conflict the statute governs the question. In
any event, and whether the law of 1878
CONSTITUTES the treaty or governs it, section
% of such treaty, I have no doubt, termi-
mated with the proceedings taken by our
government to terminate articles Is to 25.
inclusive, and article 80 of the treaty These
proceedings had their inception in Joint
resolution of congress passed May 3, 1883,
declaring that in the Judgment of congress
these articles ought to be terminated and
directing the president TO give the notice to
the government of Great Britain provided
for in article SO of the treaty Such notice
having been given two years prior to the
toned were
ABSOLUTELY TERMINATED
on the last-named day and with them article
20 was also terminated. If by any language
used in the Joint resolution it was intended
to relieve secsion 3 of the act of 1873 en-
bodyibg article 20 of the treaty from it's
oWnllm1tatlons or TO save The arGicle itself,
GILL CIiul1Cly SdulSucO GudG Ou6 lQLeQGOQ
miscarried. But, statutes granting to the
people of Canada the valuable privileges of
transit for their goods from our ports and
over our soil which had been passed prior to
the making of the treaty Of 1871 and 1nde-
pendently of it remained in force and ever
since the abrogation of the treaty aud not
withstanding the refusal of Canada to permit
tour fishermen to~send their fish 20 their home
market through her territory in bond, the
the people of that dominion have enjoyed
without diminution the advantages of our
liberal and generous laws Without basins
tour complaint upon a violation of treaty
obligations, it is nevertheless true that such
refusal Of transit and the other injurious
acts which have been recited constitute
provoking insistance upon rights neither
mitigated by the amenities of national inter
course nor modified by the recognition of
our liberaltty and generous considerations
The history of events connected with this
subject makes it manifest that the Canadian
government can, Il so disposed, administer
its laws and protect the interests of its peo-
pie without manifestation of unfriendliness
and without the unneighborly treatment of |
our fishing vessels of which we have Justly |
complained, and whatever is done on our part |
should be done in the hone that the |