St. Johnsbury Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1867-1919, 1888-03-08
THE FISHERIES TREATY.

1t was evident from the time that
the Fisheries Conference met that if
an agreement should be reached and a
treaty signed. there wOuld be a bitter
opposition in the senate, not so much
upon the merits of the treaty as for
partisan reasons. 1t is IL presidential
wear. The administration is democrat
ic, and a satisfactory adjustment of the
Canadian trouble would he a trump in
the democratic hand. 1t was quite
certain, therefore, that the treaty
would he denounced as surrender of
American rights and interests by IL
British ridden administration. The
denunciatiOn promptly followed the
publication of the treaty. That the
treaty, like all conventions designed to
settle international differences, involves
concessions upon both sides, and does
not satisfy the full claims of either
side, is IL matter of course. 1t Is not,
therefore, surprising that neither the
complete demands of our fishermen
nor the extreme views of Canada are
satisfied by the treaty. But it seems
to be an equitable arrangement of
which the fairness is attested by the
dissatisfaction of those on both sides
who hoped to gain everything by the
convention. The trouble with Canada
has arisen from various causes, lnclud-
ing IL vague Interpretation of the three
mile limit, but especially from differ
ing views of the rights of our fisher
men under the treaty of 1918, and the
usual understanding of commercial re-
ciprOcity. What was needed, there
FORE was first Il delimitatiOn or deter
minatiOn of boundaries that could not
he mistaken, and which would include
a settlement of the question of the
headlands - the question, that Is,
whether the line of the coast should be
reckoned as drawn across the mouth
of bays from headland to headland, or
as following the shore. The second
requirement was an equally definite
and unmistakable agreement upon the
subject of commercial intercourse.
Now these two cardinal objects have
been attained by the treaty. Pre-
sumptively the agreement would not
be disadvantageOus to our interests,
because it is known that Great Britain
is not disposed to adopt the extreme
Canadian view. The treaty provides
for a joint commission to specify all
the British waters in which we have
Tenounced the right to take and cure
fish. 1t provides also for our free al
mission to the Strait of Canso, which
has been hitherto denied. The prlvl-
leges of our fishing vessels in Canadian
ports are made the same as those OF
our other vessels, except that buying
bait is prohibited. But whenever and
so long as the United States shall re-
move the duty from fish oil, whale oil,
seal oil, and fish of all kinds, except
fish preserved in oil, which are the
product of Canadian fisheries, together
with the duty on ordinary coverings
and packages, then American fisher
men shall be free to buy in Canadian
ports bait, ice, seines, lines, and all
other supplies and outfits, to transshp
their catch, and to ship crews. 1t Is
further stipulated that pending the
ratification of the treaty, and In view
of the Immediate opening of the fishery
season, the privilege of entering Cana
dian bays and harbOrs shall be granted
for two years to our fishers upon pay
ment of license fee of one dollar and
a half per ton. This is apparently too
high, but it Is not part of the treaty;
1T is a temporary arrangement pending
the question of ratification.
This is the proposed adjustment of a
confused and annoying and long-con-
tinued dispute between the two great
continental neighbOrs. 1t interprets
existing agreements, and while 1t does
not, as Canadians seem to think, sur
render everything that they have
claimed, it is certainly as equitable
and liberal an arrangement as can be
fairly expected from common consent.
The treaty, indeed, provides no indem
nifty, no damages for wrongs which we
have alleged. But they were due to
the very difference of the view of
rights which the treaty temperately
and fairly adjusts. We repeat that
everything which might be wished is
not obtained, nor could that have been
fairly expected. But of the reasonable
settlement thus reached, and reached
upon our side by men who are quite as
resolute in maintaining the national
honor as the most truculent tail-twist-
er of the British lion, the alternatives
are the endless continuation and exas-
peratiOn of the quarrel, retaliation,
which is preliminary to war, and war.
Between the fair and honorable settle
ment offered by the bill and these al
ternatives, we do not believe that the
American people will hesitate. In the
settlement of such differences complete
satisfaction is secured by one side, not
by treaties, which are mutual conces-
siOns, but by armed subjugation. Bnt
when so excellent an arrangement OF
and 1rrIfafinU hiffarpne4