The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1888-02-22

OTTAWA, February 18.-The settlement
of the fishery question has already created
an angry controversy between the Govern
ment and opposite organs. Several official
newspapers, guided by the tone OF Ameri-
can dispatches, have little praise for Sir
Charles Upper; others say they will con-
tent themselves with congratula.iDg the
Commissioners on the conclusion of their
lsbors until the treaty is published. The
Liberals or opposition papers, unanimously
deplore the alleged result Montreal and
a Halifax newspaper accusing Messrs.
Upper and Cham Oerlsin of wilfully sacri-
6cing Canadian interests 1t has been ar
ranged that the next international move
will be in the direction of the location of
the boundary line between British Column
bis, the most essierly province OF the Do
miniOn, and Alaska in the event OF salts
factory settlement of the fishery question.
The matter is to ne submitted TO q commits
sion on which England will be represented.
The Canadian Government, 1t appears, has
been pressing for the appointment of
commission Tor over year past The dis
puted territory involved comprises many
thousap ds of square miles. The gold re-
glons are located near the supposed bound
Diary line but as the jurisdiction of both
countries is doubtful, considerable law
lessness prevails General Cameron, official
secretary to the Fishery Commission, Will
pro lbs bly, be one of the Canadian Commits
sioDeIs. He acted in similar capacity
when the international boundary line IN
the. West was located about fifteen years
ago.
The Free Press (Liberal) of Ottawa ga Is:
"HistOrv hes rep Gated itself. Ga each occa.
81 n that a dispute between Canada snb the
tited States has been referred to a. ira
ii n, anadian interests have been sd-cri
need. Witness the surrender Of the ) ate
of Maine and the island of San Jusn. Wit
ness the surrender Of the State OF Michigan,
which was captured by Canada during the
war of 1912. Witness the ignominious
surrender of our fisheries by Mr.. Chamber
lain, Mr.. West ard Sir Charles Topper
Mr.. Cham beIlain was doubtless more inter
esied in finding q market for his wooden
screws than in obtaining better market
for Canadian lsh. From the first 1t was
apparent that the negotiations must cod
either in a complete fzzle or a sacrifice of
Canada's interests. The worst has hap
peDed. il is announced that Mr.. Cham
berlain, Sir Charles Upper, Mr.. Thomson,
and the other parties to the surrender, are
quite satisfied with the result How could
they be otherwise? Could they, with any
show OF decency and self.respect, express
dissatisfaction with their own work? Did
Benedict Arnold ever express dsssatisfac-
ton over his own treachery? 1t is urged
that the surrender should not be discussed
lest it be rejected by the United States
Senate, If the American Senator'S reject
the treaty they will prove thems elves bet
ter friends of Canada than those whose
duty il was to protect and defend our inter-
ests before the commission"
The News says: There is one thing
pretty certain, and that is that Canada will
not De made a sacrifice in this matter as
she has been often before In others. But
if IL should turn out that the tendencies of
any proposed agreements are In that dirsc-
ton, then let the government at Ottawa
look to ii. II is strong now, but before the
public clamor such course would create,
It's support must speedily fall away and
bring ruin toitn
The Mail independently of Toronto, COM
mentiDg on the treaty says: "As a matter
of fact IL was foreordained that the Domin-
ion should suffer. Mr.. Chamberlain told
Us in so many words that he had come to
America to terminate the fishery dispute
somehow, and the English journals frankly
stated that England could not afford to
quarrel with her best foreign customer for
the sake of our fish. 1t has been the fate
of Canada from the beginning to suffer for
imperial interests, but in this instance the
cup presented to oar lips appears TO pe an
unusually bitter one"
The Montreal Herald says: 1--WE have,
gut Mull6 NC
have given up our touch and trade con-
tentiOn which the feet was fitted out to
enforce in 1885, and have conceded every
| thing. Common ustice to Sir CHARLES
compels us to reserve our criticisms until
we learn what the treaty means, bat We
fear the worst from the tone OF the Ameri-
| cen press. We have not learned what eff
| forts, ii any, were made to get our fish ad-
mitted free but feel that any arrangement
/ short of III will he looked unOn a al
nre by our fishermen and a sacrifice of
Canadian interests"
The Halifax Chronicle (LiberaD says:
dispatches from Washington declare that
| the treaty Just concluded is satisfactory to
| representatives of the three countries. This
| is quite possible, and yet, it may be very
unsatisfactory to the people OF one OF the
| countries at least. From authentic reports
reciprocity is left out of the act. 1t is not
even stipulated that Canadian fishermen
are to have the right to sell their fish in
| American markets free Of duty. What
then, in the name of commerce, is there to
/ hope for in the treaty which has now been
signed. Unless, however, we mistake the
temper OF the country, the people OF Can
/ ada will resent any surrender Of the rights
| OF Canadian fishermen for the mere pur-
pose Of suiting imperial interests. This is
a question in which Nova Scotia Is espe-
| cialIy interested. More than half of the
entire fishing industry in Canada belongs
to Nova Scotia. 1t is the most important
| industry we possess. To give American
fishermen full rights in our waters, and to
/ enable them to use our ports as a base of
| operations without any equivalent is sim
| ply base and inglorious surrender OF the
Canadian casa back down from the
lofty position assumed year ago by our
government"
4