The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1888-08-25

merchandise arriving at the ports of New York
Boston and Portland, and any other ports In the
un .l. states wncn nave been or may from time
OF the United States, and destined for her Britain
nc m;aleslys possessions in North America, may
yeyed in transit without the payment Of dnt tH
lnIougn the territory OF the United States, under
Srcn tuies regulations and conditions for the
R.oeVT.ivh OF the revenue as the government of
lne united States may from time to time pre-
sue ana under like rules, regulations and con
vna goous. wares or merchandise may be con-
sseyou III transit without the paymen: of duties
from such possessions through the territory of the
nnied STATES for export from the said ports of the
The President certainly seems to imply
that fair and equitable construction of the
article of the treaty of 1871 quoted above
would accord us the privilege of shipping
fish across Canada to the United States In
bond. To be sure he says further on that he
does not base his complaint upon violation
of treaty obligations, but, he adds, sit is
nevertheless true that such refusal of transit
and the other injurious acts which have been
recited constitute a provoking insistance
upon rights neither mitigated by the ameni-
ties of national intercourse nor modified by
the recognition of our liberality and gener-
GUS considerations"
In one of his elaborate defences of the
treaty the Hon. W. L. Putnam discussed
this question of transhipment of fish in bond.
using this language;
Only one thing remains to be considered,
and that is the matter of transshipment of
fish In bond; and this, so far from being the
cause, or indeed prominent cause of the
difficulties, was heard of only once, and then
not from fisherman in regular line but
from steam vessel, the Novelty. 1t cannot
be doubted that the privilege Is one OF value !;
but 1t cannot be demanded as a right. 1t is
not one recognized by the ordinary comfy of
nations, and as already said. 1t never has
been asserted except when granted by ex-
press treaty provisions. These propositions
are too clear to need augmentation. There
| fore its only alleged basis would be the
twenty.ninth article of the treaty of A. ID.
1871. Apparently in the view of the commits
| sioners the article did not sustain that con-
struction and in the argument of the Hon.
| Richard I'll. Dana, counsel of the United
| States at Halifax in A. ID. 1877, at. a time
asked the question: 'Does the treaty of
| 1881 give the United States the right to buy
bait, Ice, provisions, supplies for vessels and
70 transss 81, eargoes within the British
the treaty Of. Washington has not given us
these rights" Moreover, the action of the
commission in constituting this article was of
very little consequence. because the article
10 eciihinduie Wy tWO years n0tlce Dy eltner
government. If the construction put on it is
not satisfactory to the United States, Con-
| gress can den0unce it; and If different con-
| struction had been adopted unsatisfactory to
the Dominion Of Canada, it would have in
like manner been denounced by Great
| Britain.
Again says Mr.. Putnam:
The only reciprocity which can be de-
manded is that ascribed to Mr.. Dingley in a
| late interview. namely: Maritime reeinrnc-
| lty, that Is, reciprocity of maritime privi-
leges. The present treaty secures this to the
utmost. The privileges of purchasing bait
| and transshipping cargoes are not Of this
nature. The latter is never enjoyed except
In accordance with treaty grant.
According to Mr.. Putnam, then the priyi-
lege Of transshipping fish in bond cannot be
demanded as right" is mot recognized
by the ordinary comfy of nations" and
not being maritime privilege" we cannot
justly demand reciprocity in it. But the
President not only proposes to demand this
privilege which according to Mr.. Putnam is
not right, is not recognized by the comfy
of nations, and is not maritime privilege
but asks for law that will enable him to
compel the Canadians to grant it to our fish,
ermen. When Mr.. Putnam next mounts the
| stump we hope he will favor his audience
with his opinion of this performance, and
| explain how it is that privilege which a
little while ago was SO insignificant that any
reference to 1t In the treaty negotiated by
him and approved by the President, was
omitted has suddenly become of so great con-
sequence as to demand very harsh measures
to compel the Canadians to grant it.