Fergus County argus., 1888-09-06

ueitt NieNeituu Ttttui HtesstSc W
congress asking for additional powers
in reference to retaliation:
lam by no means disposed to aban-
don the interests and rights OF our
people in the premises, or neglect their
grievance, and therefore turn to the
contemplation OF ~ plan OF retalia-
tion. / am not unmindful of the
gravity OF the responsibility assumed
in adopting this line of conduct, nor
do fail to appreciate its seriousness.
1t will be impossible to injure our
Canadian neighbors by retaliatory
measures without inflicting some dam
age upon our own citizens. The policy
OF retaliation embraces the infection
OF the greatest harm upon those who
have injured us.with the least possible
damage to ourselves, and above all
things, a plan OF retaliation, il en-
tered upon, should be thorough and
vigorous.
These considerations lead me to
invoke the aid and counsel of congress
and its support in such furth grant
OF power as seems necessary and
desirable to render effective the policy
ihaveindicated. Congress has already
passed law providing that in case
American fishing vessels be in, or Wis.,
iting in waters. or at any of the ports
of the British dominion OF North
America. should be or have been lately
deprived of the rights to which they
were entitled by law, or ii they were
denied other privileges therein speci-
fled. the president might deny to YES
snlS and thar OF on1 nt
North America any entrance into the
waters, ports or harbors of the United
States, and also deny the entry into
any port or place of he United States
oi any product OF said dominions. or
other goods coming from there to the
United States. While shall not hest
tate, upon proper occasions, to enforce
this act, it would seem necessary to
| suggest that if the enforcement is linn
tied in such manner as shall result in
the least possible injury to our own
people, it would probably he entirely
inadequate to the accomplishment OF
the purpose. | deem it my duty.
therefore, to call the attention OF
congress to certain particulars i'm the
action OF the authorities OF the Do
minion OF Canada, in addition to the
general allegations already made,
which appear to be i'm such marked
contrast to the friendly position OF
our country, as IN my opinion to call
for such legislation as will, upon the
principles already stated, properly
supplement the power to inaugulra1e
the retaliation already vested IN the
executive. Actuated by the generous
spirit which has characterized our leg
| islatiOn, our tariff laws have been,
since 1866, so far waived in favor OF
Canada as to allow free of duty the
transit across the territory of the
United states OF property arriving at
our port 4.4d tle.t iaea te, ets4ss ealtt
exported from Canada to other coun-
tries. CThe president here quotes the
twenty-ninth article of the treaty Oi
| Washington between the United States
and Great Britain, negotiated i'm 1871
which he says was largely modifica-
tion of the treaty of Isl =, i'm which he
privileges referred to were made recip-
rOcal and given by Canada to the
United States.) Continuing, the presi-
dent says: During the last six years
the imports and exports of the British
Canadian provinces, carried across the
United States under privileges granted
by our laws, amounted in value to
about S21 200, 900. nearly all of which
were goods dutiable under our tariff
laws. BY far the larger part of this
traffic consists of exchanges of goods
between Great Britain and her Ameri
can provinces, brought to and carrie,l
from our ports in her own vessels. The
treaty stipulations entered int by on,
government were in harmony with the
laws which were then on our ST atutt
books and are still i'm force. ! recon-
mend immediat e legislative action. con
ferring upon the executive power tC
suspend by proclamation the opera
ton OF all laws and regulations per
mitting the transit of goods, wares and
merchandise in bond across or ovel
the territory Of the United States, to
or from Canada. There need he nc
hesit tatiOn i'm suspending those laws
arising from the stippOsition that theiI
continuation is secured by treaty. fol
IT seems quite plain that article 30 O
the treaty OF 1871, which WAS the only
article incorporating such laws, termi
mated in July, 1855. The article ltsel
declares that its provisions shall re
main in force for the term of year,
mentioned in article 30 of this treaty
Turning to article 33 We find no men
ton OF the 29th article, but find pro
vision referring to articles Is to 25 in
clusive. and to article 30. | am O
opinion that the term OF years" ~
ferred to in article 80 means the periot
for which articles I 4 to 25 inclusive
and article 30, commonly called tn,
Fishery article" shall continue il
force.
In addition to other satisfactOr,
evidence supporting the construction
OF the language of article 20, it will b.
found that the law passed by congress
March /, 1873, to carry the treat,
into effect, furnishes conclusive proc
OF thecorrectnessO OF such construction
After quoting the act of March, 1873
the president says: Here, then, is 4
distinct statement, limiting the dura
tion of this article OF the treaty to tn
time that articles l 3 to 25 inclusive
and article 30, should continue il
force. There appearing to be no con
tlict or inconsistency between tn
treaty and act of congress last cited
it is not necessary to invoke the we'll
settled principle that in case of sucl
conflict the statute governs the ques
tiOn. Whether the law OF 1873 con
strues the treaty or governs it, section
l29 Of such treaty, ! have no doubt