The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1888-02-23
THE TREATY.
Interviews with Portland Fish Firms
on the Matter.
Hon. William /. Putnam Makes
Some Statements.

Some Statements.
Yesterday representative of the PRESS
called on various fishing firms to get
their views on the treaty Some few
were not prepared to speak but the gist of
the other statements is herewith append
ed. Mr. Putnam also makes the following
statements that will prove of interest.
CUSHING & McKENNEY.
Messrs. Gushing Il Mckinney thought that
by the terms of the treaty we were not any
better off than we were before it was signed.
We have been inforaed that we are given
the right to fish at Labrador and Magdalene
islands, a right that has never been ques-
toned, but the treaty has not informed us
as to what is to be done in reference to the
vessels fined by the Dominion government
the last two years. In regard to the tonnage
duties the treaty bears especially hard on
our fishermen. Suppose that one OF our yes
sells shuRld go into a Canadian port out of
bait, once in a season, and buy So worth.
She would have TO pay about $50 in tonnage
dues for the privilege. There is nothing said
in the treaty about the procuring bait for the
supply OF the Canadian codfshery. The
Canadians don't send their vessels here now
for the bait hut have it forwarded to them.
AS result our own vessels have to pay just
SO much more for their own bait If then
our vessels have to pay $3.50 barrel more
for their own bait, shouldn't the duty ON
Canadian fish be increased in like proper
ton?
SARGENT, LORD & sKILLIN.
Mr.. Sargent thought it was pretty poor
treaty, but poor treaty telling what the
fshermen's lights are is better than to be
harrassed aud annoyed by not knowing what
they are. If the $3.50 tonnage due is to pre-
vail, the fishermen might as well go out of
business. They can't do business on those
terms.
Mr.. Skillin couldn't see as there was but
one thing decided by the treaty and that was
the definition of the three mile limit.
L. G. WILLARD & co.
Mr.. Willard said he had before him the
published testimony of the Portland fish
firms, taken by the congressional delegation
when they visited Portland in the summer
of 1886. In that testimony they declared
that they didn't want anything of Canada,
and that 1t would not be privilege to buy
bait in the Canadian ports. He thought
they had all better wait until they heard
from Gloucester That town, he remarked,
was the head and front of the fisheries. If
the Gloucester people think it fair treaty.
it viii be ratified; If they don't it won't
| Mr.. j. A. Emery, who was present, coiucid-
| ed with Mr.. Willard
GEORGE TREFETHEN q co.
Mr.. George Trefethen didn't think much
of the three-mile limit as defined by the
| treaty, but it was better to have it settled as
to how and what it was than not to have it
defined at all. OF the treaty as whole he
didn't think much. 1t seemed to him that
we give up everything we have ever claimed
for nothing He thought we should have
the same privileges accorded our fishing YES
sells in Canadian ports that are accorded to
| our merchant marine, but the treaty doesn't
| give them. The idea of paying 800 to $3.50
tonnage tax for the privilege of using the
| Canadian ports he considered absurd, for ac-
cordlng to the protocol, if not by the treaty
itself, that's what-if the protocol is agreed
| to by the Senate-will be demanded by the
| Canadian government. Then again, by Ar
| ticle XI of the treaty, vessel on the home
| ward voyage will be allowed to purchase pro-
| visions in Dominion port, but not on the
| outward, condition that should not require
| any treaty The most unciyilized Fiji ISL
ander would grant such request Again,
| Mr.. Trefethen said he would like to know
what was meant by the term preparing to
| fish," in Article XIV. Does it mean mend
| al, +I,o Xvi, .
| Choir, or batting travis? If so, what sense
is there in the clause? The uninterrupted
navigation of the Straits Of Canso he didn't
consider amounted to anything. Our en-
| rolled fishing vessels should have the same
privileges in Canadian ports that their reg
istered fishing vessels do in our ports. He
couldn't see where we were any better off
than when under the treaty of 1918.
| LEWIS, CHASE & WRITTEN.
! Mr.. Written said: We cannot believe that
the fishery treaty will receive the entire ap-
proyal of those engaged in the fisheries.
While according to Article Y, American fish
ing vessels are allowed the privilege of en-
| tering Canadian harbors and bays, for the
purpose of shelter and repairs, and for get
| ting wood and water without being obliged
| to enter or clear, yet there appears some Sc
we're restrictions which are not conducive to
American interests and which cannot pro-
mote peace and good will between the two
| countries. Why not the American fishing
vessel entitled to the same protection and
the same rights in a foreign port as an
| American merchantmen? Why should they
be singled out and subjected to these severe
unnatural laws? 1t is of every day occur
renee, for English goods to be shipped in
| bond over this country, but according to arti-
| Gle XII American fishing vessels can only re-
| ship their cargoes of fish from Canadian ports
under stress of weather or other casualties
unless the United States agree to remove the
duty from fish. The only provision in the
treaty for the purchase of bait by American
fishermen in Canadian ports is found in Ar
ticle XIV, and that condition is when the
United States throws open its markets free
to Canadian fish then the latter country will
grant free license to purchase bait, etc.
The period not exceeding two years from the
present date proposed by the plenipotentia-
| ries giving the American fishermen the priv
| ilege of entering harbors and bays of the
Atlantic coast Of Canada by paying an an
nnal license of one dollar and half per ton,
for the purpose of buying bait, ETC., is an
adroit work Of diplomacy, and, If adopted, it
would work to the disadvantage of any
American vessel purchasing either bait or
provisions in any Canadian port. For in
stance, vessel of one hundred tons burden
purchasing SIS worth of bait would have
tonnage dues to pay Of $3.50.
He did not think we had gained anything
except the privilege of allowing our vessels
in Canadian ports without being obliged to
enter or clear. 1t is quite evident that what
the Canadians desire is that our markets
shall be open to them free for their fish, oil,
&C., and that they are holding back the priv
ilege of buying bait and shipping fish for the