The Russellville Democrat., 1888-08-30

tions and conditions for the protection of the
 revenue as the governments of the said Posses
 sions may from time to time pre-
 scribe, and under like rules and
 regulations and conditions, goods, wares or
 merchandise may be conveyed in transit with
 out payment of duties from the United States
 through the said Possessions to other places in
 the United States, UT for export from ports in
 the sand Possessions"
 In the year 1886 notice was received by the
 representatives of our Government that our fishermen would no longer be allowed to ship their fish in bond and free of duty through Canadian territory to this country; and ever since that time such shipment has been denied. The privilege of such shipment which had been extended to our fishermen, was a most important one. allowing them to spend the time upon the fishing grounds which would otherwise be devoted to voyage with their catch, and doubling their opportunities for prosecuting their vocation In forbidding the transit of the catch of our fishermen over their territory in bond, and free of duty. the Cana dian authorities deprived us Of the only facility dependent upon their concession, and for which we could supply no substitute.
 The value to the Dominion of Canada of the privilege of transit for their exports and imports across our territory and to and from our ports though great in every aspect, will be better appreciated when it is remembered that for considerable portion of each year the St. Lawrence river which constitutes the direct avenue of foreign commerce leading to Canada
 closed by ice, during the last six years the imports and exports of the British Canadian Provinces carried across our territory under the privileges granted by our laws amounted to about two hundred and seventy millions of dollars, nearly all of which were dutiable under the tariff laws, by far the larger part of this traffic consisting of ex. changes of goods between Great Britain and her American provinces, brought to and car ried from our ports in their own vessels. The treaty stipulation entered into by our Govern ment was in harmony with laws which were then on our statute book. and are still in force.
 recommend immediate legislative action conferring upon the Executive the power to suspend by proclamation the operation of all laws and regulations permitting the transit Of goods, wares and merchandise in bond across or over the territory of the United States to or from Canada. There need be no hesitation in suspending these laws arising from the suppo' sition that continuation is secured by treaty obligations for it seems quite plain that Article 29 of the treaty of 1871, which was the only arti- cle incorporating such laws, terminated the first day of July, 1885 The article itself declares that the provisions shall be Tn force for the term of years mentioned in Article 8 of
  mention Of the Twenty ninth article, but only @ provision that Articles IS to g inclusive and Article 90 shall take effect as soon as the laws required to carry them into operation shall be passed by tho legislative bodies of the different countries concerned, that they shall remain in force for the period of ten years from the date at which they may come into oper- ation; and further until the expiration of two years after either of the high contracting parties shall have given notice to the other Of It's wish to terminate the same.
 I am of the opinion that the terms of years mentioned in Article 33, referred to in Article 10 as the limit of its duration, means the pe- riod during which Articles IS to 25, inclusive. and Article 30-commonly called the fishery articies-should continue in force under the language Of Article 33 That the Joint High Commissioners who negotiated the treaty so understood and intended the phrase is cer- tain, for in statement containing an account Of their negotiations, prepared under their su- pervsion and approved 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 a reciprocal arrangement in that respect for the period for which the fishery articles should be in force"
 In addition to this very satisfactory evi, dence supporting this construction of the language of Article 20, 1t will be found that the law passed by Congress to carry the treaty into effect furnishes conclusive proof of the correctness of such construction. This was passed March |, 1873, and iSentitled an act to carry into effect the provisions of the treaty between the United States and Great Britain, signed in the city of Washington the eighth day of May, 1871, relat. ing to the fisheries. After proceeding, in its first and second sections for putting in opera ton Articles IS 10 9 inclusive, and Article nf ha ha hird Ia AA. voted to Article 29 as follows:
 Section s.-'srhat from the date of the Presidents proclamation authorized by the first section Of this act, and so long as Articles IS to 9 inclusive and Article 30 of said treaty shall remain in force according to the terms and conditions of Article 33 Of said treaty, all goods, wares and merchandise arriving, etc.. etc." following in the remainder of the section the precise words of the stipulation on the part of the United States contained in Article 29 which have already fully quoted.
 Here, then, is a distinct enactment of the Congress limiting the duration of this article of the treaty to the tune Articles IS to 25 in- elusive, and Article 3D should continue in force. That in fixing such limitation it but gave the meaning Of the treaty itself, is indicated by the fact that it's 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 promu lga ti on of the treaty, to certain members of the Joi mt High Commission, representing both countries and met with no objection or dissent
 There appearing to be no conflict or incon- sistency between the treaty and the act of the Congress last cited, 1t is not necessary to in yoke the well-settled principle that fin case of such conflict the statute governs the question. In any event and whether the law of 1873 con strues the treaty or governs 1t, Section 2e Of such treaty, have no doubt terminated with the proceedings taken by our Government to terminate Articles IS to 9 inclusive, and Arti- cle 30 of the treaty These proceedings had their inception in a joint resolution of Congress passed May 8, 1sss declaring that in the judg- ment Of Congress these articles ought to be terminated and directing the President to give notice to the Governmen nt Of Great Britain, provided for in Article 33 Of the treaty. Such notice having been given two years prior to the first day Of July, 1885 the articles mentioned were absolutely terminated on the last-named day, and with them Article 29 was also terminated If by any language used In the joint resolution, 1t was intended to re. leve Section of the act of 1873, embodying Article go of the treaty from it's own limita- tions, or to save the article am entirely satis- fled that the intention miscarried, but statutes granting to the people Of Canada valuable priv. ileges Of transit for their goods from our ports and over our soil, winch had been passed prior 
 pendently of 1t, remained in force and ever since the abrogation of the treaty, and not withstanding tho refusal of Canada to permit our fishermen to send their fish to their home market through her territory fin bond, the people of the Dominion have enjoyed without diminution the advantages of our liberal and generous laws. Without passing our complaint upon violation of treaty obli- gatons, 1t is nevertheless true that such re- fusal Of transit and the other injurious acts which have been recited constitute a provok- ing insistance upon rights neither mitigated by the amenities Of National intercourse, nor modified by the recognition of our iiberality and generous consideration. The history of events connected with this subject makes it manifest that the Canadian Government can, if so disposed, administer its laws and protect the interests ofits people without manifestation of unfriendliness, and without the unneghbor- ly treatment of our fishing vessels of which We have justly complained, and whatever is dono on our part should be done in the hope that the disposition of the Canadian Government may remove the occasion of resort to the addi-