The Columbian. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1866-1910, 1888-08-31

by them, we find the following entry
on the subject. "The transit question
was discussed, and it was agreed that
any settlement that might be made
should include reciprocal arrange
ment in that respect for the period for
which the fishery articles should be in
| force"
In addition to this very satisfactory
evidence supporting this construction
of the language of article twenty nine
it will be found that the law passed by
Congress to carry the treaty into effect
! furnishes conclusive proof of the cor
rectness of such construction.
THE LAW OF 1878.
This law was passed March 1, 1878,
and it is entitled San act to carry in
to effect the provisions of the treaty
between the United States and Great
Britain, signed in the city of Washing
ton the Sth day of May, 1871, relating
to the fisheries" After providing in
its first and second sections for put
ting in operation articles eighteen to
twenty-five inclusive, and article
thirty of the treaty, the third section is
devoted to article twenty-five, as fol-
lows:
"SEo. 3. That from the date of the
Presidents proclamation authorized by
the first section of this act, and 80 long
as the articles eighteenth to twenty
fifth, inclusive, and article thirtieth Of
said treaty, shall remain in force ac-
cording to the terms and condition OF
article thirty-third of said treaty, all
goods, wares and merchandise arrlv-
ing. ETC., etc.
Following in the remainder of the
section the precise words of the stipu-
lation on the part of the United States
as contained in article twenty nine,
which l have already quoted.
Here, then, is distinct enactment
of the Congress limiting the duration
of this article of the treaty to the time
that articles eighteen to twenty-five, in
elusive, and article thirty, should con-
tinue in force. That in fixing such
limitation it but gave the meaning of
the treaty itself, is indicated by the
fact that its purpose is declared to be
TO carry into effect the provisions of
tho treaty, and by the further fact that
its purpose is declared to be to carry
into effect the provisions of the treaty,
and by the further fact that this law
appears to have been submitted before
the promulgation of the treaty to GER
tain members of the Joint High Com
mission representing both countries,
and met with no objection or dissent.
There appearing to be no conflict OF
inconsistency between the treaty and
the act of the Congress last cited, it is
! not necessary to invoke the well-settled
principle that in case of such conflict
the statute governs the question.
SECTION TwENTY-NINE TERMINATED.
In any event and whether the law
of 1878 construes the treaty or governs
it, section 80 of such treaty, / haye nc
doubt, terminated with the proceedings
taken by our government to terminate
articles Is to 25 inclusive, and article
80 of the treaty. These proceedings
had their inception in joint resolution
of Congress passed May 3, 1878 de,
claring that in the judgn ent of Con
gress these articles ought to be termi
mated, and directing the President to
give the notice to the government o1
Great Britain provided for in article
33 of the treaty. Such notice having
been given ten years prior to the frs,
day of July, 1885, the articles mention
ed were absolutely terminated on the
last named day, and with them article
20 was also terminated.
If by any language used in the joini
resolution 1t was intended to relieve
section three of the act of 1878, EN-
bodying article twenty nine of the
treaty, from its own limitations, or tC
save the article itself, am entirely sat
isfed thatthe intention miscarried.
| But statutes granting to the people
of Canada the valuable privileges O.
transit for their goods from our port,
and over our soil, which have bee
passed prior to the making of thu
treaty of 1871 aud Independently oI
it, remained in force, and ever sine,
the abrogation of the treaty, notwith
standing the refusal of Canada to per
init our fisherman to send their fish tt
their home market through their ter
ritory in bond, the people of tina
Dominion havA enjoyed without dimi
nu ton the advantages of our libera
and generous laws.
Without basing our complaint upol
violation of treaty obligations, it is
nevertheless, true that such refusal O
transit and the other injurious act
which have been recited constitute
provoking insistence upon right
neither mitigated by the amenities @
national intercourse nor modified b
the recognition of our liberality an
generous considerations.
oANADA's UNNEIGHBoRLY CONDUCT.
The history of the events connecte
with this subject makes it NANTES
that the Canadian Government can,
so dispo,ed, administer its laws an
! protect the interests OF its people with
out manifestation of unfrendiness, an
without the unneighborly treatment c
, our fishing vessels of which we hav
justly complained, and whatever
, done on our part should be don
in the hope that the dispositio
Of the Canadian Government may r,
move the occasion of a resort to th
executive power now sought throug
Legislative action.
| am satisfied that upon the prime
Piles which should govern retaliatio
our intercourse and relations with ii
Dominion of Canada furnish no bette
opportunity for its application than
suggested by the conditions herei
presented, and that it could not t
more effectively inaugurated than III
der the power of suspension recon
, mended.
While l have expressed my Gle,
| conviction upon the question of IL
, continuance of section 20 of the treat
> of 1871, of course fully concede IL
power and the duty OF the Congress,
, contemplating legislative action
l construe the terms of any treaty stip
: lation which might, upon any possib
consideration of good faith, limit SUI