Audubon County Republican. [volume] (Audubon, Audubon Co., Iowa) 1885-1894, 1888-08-30
THE FISHERY TREATY.
A Message From the President on the
subject

| between the Omitted States aud Great Britain,
concerning the rights and privileges Of Amerl-
can Fishermen In the ports andwaters OF British
| North America, seems to Justify survey of
the condition to which the pending question
| Is thus remitted. The treatyupon this subject,
| concluded In ISIS, through disagrecments rs To
| the meaning of its terms, has been fruitful
| source OF Irritation and troublc Our citizens
| engaged IN fishing enterprises In the water adj
! jacent to Canada have been subjected to nu-
merous vexatious interlercnccs aud annoy
| anccs, their vessels have been seized upon pre-
texts which appeared to he entirely nadinls.
| sihle, aud they have been otherwise treated by
the Canadian authorities and officials In a
manner incScusably harsh and oppressive.
| This conduct has been justified by Great
| Britain aud Canada by the claim that the
| treaty OF 1878 permitted IL, aud upon the
ground that II was necessary to u proper pro-
lection Il Canadian interests, We deny that
| treaty agreements Justify these acts, and we
further maintain that, aside from any treaty
restraints OF disputed Interpretation, the rela.
tive positions Of the United States and Canada
as near neighbors, tho growth Of our Joint
commerce, the development and prosperity Of
both countries, which amicahlc relations surely
guarantee, and above all, the liherality always
| extended by the United States To the people Of
! Canada, furnished more basis for kindness and
| consideration higher and better than treaty
| covenants. While keenly sensitive to all that
was cxasperatng In the condition, and by no
| plants Of our injured citizens, still deemed
| II my duty 10 attempt by negotiation To remedy
| the existing wrongs aud finally terminate by u
fair aud just treaty these ever recurring causes
| OF difficulty ! fully believe the treaty Just
rejected by the Senate was well suited to tho
eNigency, and that Its provisions were adequate
for our security In the future from the vexa-
tious incidents, and for the promotion Of
friendly neghborhood aud intimacy, without
sacrificing In tho least our national pride or
dignity. IT IL OF Importance TO note that this
treaty has been rejected without any apparent
disposition ON the part Of the Senate to alter or
amend Its provisions and with the evident In
! tsntlon that no negotiation should at present
| be concluded touching the matter at issue.
am by no means disposed 10 abandon the In
terests and rights of our people In the promises
| or TO neglect their grievances, and therefore
| turn the contemplation Of plan OF reialia-
| ton Us the mode which stlll remains OF treat
| ing the situation. | am not unnindful ot tho
gravity of the responsibility assumed Ia adopt.
| Ing this line OF conduct, nor do fall In the
least 10 appreciate Its serious consequences. IL
Will be impossible 10 inlure our Canadian
nelghbors by retaliatory measures without In,
| ficting some damage upon our own citizens,
The policy OF national retaliation manIfestly
embraces the inillction OF the greatest harm
upon those who have injured us, with the
least possible damage 10 ourselves, and above
all things, the plan of retaliation II entered up
ON, should be thorough aud vigorous These
considerations lead me Ia invoke the aid and
counsel OF Congress and lts support In such
further grant OF power rs seems necessary and
desirable to render effective tho policy have
Indicated Congress has already passed n law
providing that In case OF American fishing
vessels being or visiting In the waters or ut
| any OF the ports Of tho British domluons OF
North America, should be or lately had been
deprived of the rights to which they were en-
titled by treaty or law, or II they We're denied
tuIn thnr iNil thn
President might deny to the vessels and their
masters or crews, Of the British dominons Of
North America, any entrance Into the waters,
ports or harbors of the United States, aud also
deny entry into any port or place of the United
States Of any product Of said dominions or
other goods coming from said dominions 10
the United States. While shall not hesitate
upon tho proper occasions 10 enforce this net,
u would seem unnecessary to suggest that, "
such enforcement Is limited In such manner
as shall result In the least possible injury 10
our own people, the effect would probably be
entirely Inadequate to the accomplishment Of
the purpose desired. j deem II my duty there
fore 70 call the attention OF Congress 10 certain
particulars IN the action OF the authorities OF
the dominion OF Canada In addition To the
general allegations already madowhch appear
to be In such marked contrast To the liberal
and friendly position OF our country as In my
opinion 30 call for such legislation as will upon
the principles already stated, properly sup
plcment the power TO inaugnrntc the retalin-
ton already vested In the executive. Actuatcd
by generous spirit which Inns characterized
our legislation, our tariff laws have since 1868
been 80 far waived IN favor OF Canada ms to
allow, free OF duty, the transit across the terri
tory Of the United States Of property arriving
at our ports and destined 10 Canada, or export
cd from Canada to other countries. The Presl.
dent here quotes the twcnty-ninth article OF
the treaty OF Washington between the United
States and Great Britain, negotiated In 1871,
which he says was largely modification OF the
treaty Of 1918, In which the privileges above
referred TO were made reciprocal and given In
return by Canada 10 the United States. Con-
tinulng the President says: During the last
six years the imports and exports Of the British
Provinces, carried across our territory under
the privileges granted by our laws, amounted
In value TO about S270,00O,000, nearly all Of
which were goods dutiable under our tariff
laws. BY far larger part Of this traffic CON
sisted Of exchanges Of goods between Great
Britain and her American Provinces, brought
TO and carried from our ports In our own yes
sells. The 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. i recommend Immediate legisla-
tive action comforting upon the executive pow
or TO suspend by proclamation the operation OF
oil laws and regulations permitting the transit
Of goods, wares and merchandise In bond
across or over territory OF the United States TO
In suspending these laws arising from the sup
position that their continuation II secured by
treaty obligations, for II seems quite plain that
article 20 OF the treaty OF 1871, which was the
only article incorporating such laws, tcrmin-
ated July lst 1885. The article itself declares
that Its provisions shall remain In force
'for the term OF years mentioned In article
90 Of the treaty." Turning TO article
33, we find no mention Of the Goth article,
but find provision referring to articles IS
TO % inclusive, and article 80. | am Of
opinion that the "term Of years. referred TO In
In article 10 means the period during which ar
ticles IL TO ~, inclusive, and article 30, com
monty called Fisheries article" shall continue
In force. In addition 10 other satisfactory cyi-
dence supporting the construction OF the Ian
guage Of Article 20 1t will be found that the
law passed by Congress March !, 1873, TO carry
the treaty into effect furnishes conclusive proof
OF the correctness OF such construction. After
quoting the Act Of March, 1878, the President
says: Here then Is u distinct enactment OF
Congress limiting the duration Of this article
OF the treaty to the time that article 10 % Ia
elusive, and article 80 should continue In force.
There appearing to be no conflict or inconslst-
ency between the treaty and the act Of Congress
last cited, II Is not necessary TO invoke the well
settled principle that In case OF such conflict
the statute governs the question. Whether
the law Of 1873 CONSTITUTES the treaty or governs
It, section 20 Of such treaty, | have no doubt,
terminated with proceedings taken by our Gov
eminent to terminate Articles Is to % inclusive,
and Article 80 Of the treaty. These proceed
ings had their inception In joint resolution
Of Congress, passed May 8, 1888, declaring that
these articles ought to be terminated, and
directing the President TO give notice TO Great
Britain, provided for In Article 80 Of the treaty.
Such notice having been given two years prior
to the first day Of July 1885, the articles men
toned were absolutely terminated on that day,
but the statutes granting TO the people OF Can
ada the valuable privileges OF transit for their
goods, which had been passed prior TO the max
Ing OF the treaty Of 1871, and Independently OF
II, remained In force, and ever since the abro-
CATION Of the treaty the people OF that Dominion
have enjoyed without diminution, the adyanta-
ges Of our liberal and generous laws Without
basing our complaint upon the violation OF
treaty obligations, 1t Is nevertheless, true that
such refusal Of transit and other injurious acts,
which have been recited, constitute provoking
iDsstance upon rights, neither mitigated by
the amenities Of national intercourse nor mod
fled by the recognition Of our liberality and
generous considerations. The history OF events
connected with this subject makes 1t very man
ifcst that the Canadian Government can adj
minister its laws and protect the interests OF
Its people without the manifestation OF I'M
fricndliness and without unneighborly treat
ment II our fishing vessels, OF which we have
justly complained, and whatever Is done on our