St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1888-02-23
The New Tork Tribune Says
the Treaty Is a Feeble
Compromise.
The Toronto Mail Says the
Americans Have Won
Their Case.
While Friends Of Chamber
lain and Bayard Send Up
Shouts Of Joy.
All Of Which Would Point to
An Equal Adjustment Of
the Matter.

NEW YORK, Feb. 22.-In regard to
the fisheries treaty the Tribune says:
The state departments diplomatic tri-
umph is feeble and incoherent COM
promise. The full text of the fisheries
treaty enables us to understand why
Secretary Bayard considers the hollow
truce arranged by him a decisive tri-
umph. He has never approached this
subject from the American point Of
view. He has dealt with it as an inter
national quarrel caused by ambiguous
constructions of all antiquated treaty,
and by complex and ill-defned fishery
rights. He has regarded it solely as a
technical controversy, which could be
settled by new and more careful def
initions of those rights and by more elias
tic construction of the disputed clauses
of the treaty of 1918. He has nego-
tiated convention on this basis. de-
filming the three-mile limit, cOmpromis-
ing the headlands question and desig-
mating certain commercial privileges in
addition to the right conferred upon
American fishermen seventy years ago
to obtain ''shelter, repairs, wood and
water" in Canadian harbors. From his
own point of view he has succeeded
fairly well in adjusting these techni-
cal questions: but even if he has done
this, he has failed to vindicate the
honor of the nation by defending the
rights of citizens engaged in a lawful
calling. He has failed to do this be-
cause he has never perceived that the
honor OF the nation had been cOmprO-
missed by the OutrageS on the Canadian
seabOard. He has approached the sub
ject in the spirit of a pettifOgging
lawyer, bent upon splitting hairs over
technical points, and not as the patriotic
representative Of great nation under
obligations to resent insults to the flag
and wantOn Interference with estab-
lished rights and international comfy.
The most valid objection to the treaty
is this patent fact-that nearly all these
Outrages and indignities
CAN BE REPEATED UNDERIT
with the same impunity as before the
technical questions relating to the three
mile limit, the headlandS claim and the
breadthS of the bays, closed against
American fishermen, did not affect one
seizure in twenty made in 1886. If ceT-
tain commercial privileges have been
added to the four treaty rights of ''shel-
ter, repairs, wood and water" the fish
ermen already possessed them under
the proclamation of 1880 relating to
maratime reciprocity; and even if they
did not, their rights under the treaty of
1918 were wantOnly denied and any new
privileges conferred by the Chamber
laln-Bayard convention may. prove
equally worthless. The Canadian gov
nrnmnnt with thnir Io
tons, deliberately harassed and perse-
secuted American fishermen in order to
force the United States to take off the
duty on fish. That was their objective
point; and it will be again, treaty or no
treaty. Indeed. by the provisions for
tonnage dues to be paid to Canadian Of
ficials, Secretary Bayard arms them
with new facilities for operating against
American fishermen. There is nothing
in this treaty to prevent the recurrence
Of outrageS on the Dominion Seaboard.
1t is convention that will be as unpOp-
ular in Canada as i'll New England. 1t
does not offer basis for the permanent
settlement of the fisheries question. 1t
should be summarily rejected by pa
trlOtlc and Self-reSpecting senate, which
proposed a far more adequate method of
protecting American fishing rights.
REMEDIES ALI. GRIEVANCES.
The Herald says: We advise the fish
ermen of New England to examine this
treaty carefully before they allow Re-
publican clamOr to lead them to find
fault with it. 1t seems to us to remedy
all their just grievances, and we advise
them not to forget that the country at
large has never become very deeply eX-
cited over their complaints, and that if
they should now show themselves ul-
reasonable they will lose even the mod
crate public sympathy which was with
them.
CANNOT HOPE FOR BETTER.
The Times says: This treaty has al
ready been heartily opposed and bit
terly criticised by some of the Republi-
can senators, particularly those repre-
Senting the fishing interests. This OPP
position is natural, though it is incon-
SiStent. We do not believe it is wise.
We hope it may not be shared by enough
other Republicans to defeat the treaty.
We obtain under this agreement greater
advantages than have ever been ac-
corded so freely before. These include
everything that has been claimed by us,
with the exception of fishing III a rela-
lively limited area. They include the
abolition of the headland theory and
nearly complete freedom of intercourse.
except the purchase of bait and like
supplies. We cannot hope to obtain
better terms by mutual agreement. 1t
is open to us at any time to obtain all
we have ever wished by the repeal of
the duty on Canadian fish, which, as to
most of the product, is = cent pound.
The alternative to the ratification of the
treaty is the reOpening and indefinite
proiongatiOn of veXed. complicated
and, in our opinion, useless and sense
less quarrel. We do not believe the
American people desire that.
The World announces in its editorial
columns that the treaty is published in
full on another mage but ma kpS no cOm-