Barton County democrat. [volume] (Great Bend, Kan.) 1885-1915, 1888-08-30

regulations and conditions. wares or merchan
disc may be conveyed in transit. without pay
ment OF duties from the United States through
said possessions TO other places in the United
States. or for exports in the said 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 de-
MED The privilege of such shipment, which
had been extended to our fishermen, was q
most important one. allowing them to spend
the time upon the fishing grounds, which
would otherwise be devoted to a voyage
home with their catch and doubling their OPP
portunities for proftably prosecuting their vo-
cation In forbidding the transit OF the
catch OF our fishermen over their territory in
bond and free OF duty, the Canadian authori-
ties deprived US OF the only facility dependent
upon the concession and for which we could
supply substitute. The value to the Domln-
ion OF Canada of the privilege OF transit for
their exports and imports across our territory
and to and from ports, though great in every
aspect. will be better appreciated when ii is re-
membered that for u considerable portion of
each year the ST. Lawrence river, which consti-
tutes the direct avenue 10 foreign commerce
leading to Canada, is closed by ice. During the
last six years the imports and exports OF Brit
ish Canadian provinces carried across
territory under the privileges granted by our
laws amounted value TO about sS70 O00.00l.
nearly all OF which were goods duti-
able under tarin laws. BY far the larger
part of this traf1c consisted OF exchange of
groods between Great Britain and her American
provinces. brought to and carried from our
p rts in their own vessels. The treaty stipula-
ton entered into by our Government was in
harmony with laws that were then on our
statute books and are still in force. recon-
mend legislative action comforting upon the ex-
ecutive the power to suspend by proclamation
the operation of all laws and regulations per
hitting the transit of goods, wares and mer-
chandise in bond across or over the territory OF
the United States TO or from Canada
There need be no hesitation in suspendinR
these laws arising from the supposttion that
their continuance is secured by treaty obliga-
tons. for 1t seems quite plain that article % OF
the treaty OF 1871, which was the only article
incorporating such laws, terminated July i,
1885. The article itself declares that its pro-
visions shall be in force "for the term OF years
mentioned in article SO OF this treaty" Turn
ing to article 80 we find no mention OF the 29th
| article, but only provision that articles Is
to IS, inclusive, and article 30 shall take
effect us soon as the laws required to
carry them into operation shall be passed by
the legislative bodies of the different coun-
| tries concerned, and that they shall remain in
| force for ten years from the date at which they
may come into operation and further until the
expiration OF two years after either OF the high
contracting parties shall have given notice 10
| the o Their OF its wish 10 terminate the same.
| 1 am of the opinion that the term of years
mentioned in article 3d." referred to in article
|
period During which articles 10 to p inclusive
| and article 80, commonly called the Fishery
articles" shall continue in force under
| the language OF said article 80. That the
| joint high commissioners who negotiated the
treaty SO understood and intended to phrase
is certain, for in a statement containing an &C
count OF their negotiations, prepared under
their supervision and approval by them, We find
the following entry on the subject: 1.-The tr nsit
question was discussed and 1t was agreed that
any settlement that might be made should in
clude reciprocal arrangement in that respect
| for the period for which the fishery articles
shall be in force"
In addition TO this very satisfactory evidence
supporting this construction OF the Language OF
artical 20 il will be found that the law passed
| by Congress to carry the treaty into effect
| furnishes conclusive proof OF the correctness
| such construction This law was passed March
1873, and is entitled IAN act TO carry into effect
| the provisions of the treaty between the
| United States and Great Britain. signed in
| Washington, May 8. 1871, relating to the
| fisheries" After providing in its first and
articles Is to 25 inclusive and article
| 30 of the treaty, the third section is de-
voted to article 20 as follows: Section 3-That
| from the date of the Presidents proclamation
authorized by the first section OF this act and
so long the articles 10 TO Is inclusive and
article 30 of said treaty shall remain in force
cording to the terms and conditions OF article
| SO OF the treaty all goods, wares and merchan-
| OF the section the precise words OF the stpula-
| ton the part of the United States as con-
| tanned in article 90. which 1 have already
| fully quoted. Here, then, is distinct
enactment OF the Congress limiting the
duration OF this article OF the treaty TO the time
| that articles Is to 25 inclusive and arti lie
| 30 should continue in force. That IN FIX
| ing such limitation il 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 the treaty and by the further
| fact that this law appears to have been submit
| ted before the PRONUNCIATION OF the treaty TO
certain members Of the joint high commission
| representing both countries and met with no
| objection or dissent. There appearing to be no
conflict inconsistency between the treaty
and the act OF the Congress last cited, II is not
| necessary to invoke the well settled principle
| that in case OF such conflict the statute governs
| the question.
In any event and whether the law OF 1873 con-
| strues the treaty or governs il, section 90 Of
such treaty, I have no 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 a joint resolution OF Congress
passed May 3, 1888 declaring that in the judg-
ment of Congress these articles ought TO be ter
minated, and directing the President to give
| the notice to the Governm ent OF Great Britain
provided for in article 30 OF the
| treaty. Such notice. having been Civ
| en- two years prior TO July !, 1885, the
| articles mentioned were absolutely terminated
on the last day named, and with them article 90
| was also terminated. II by any language used
| in the joint resolution il was intended TO re-
| lieVe section 8 OF the act OF 1873 embodying ar
ticle % of the treaty from its limitations or
to save the article ITSELF am entirely satisfied
that the intention miscarried. But the statutes
granting the people OF Canada the valuable
privilege oftransit for their goods from ports
and over soil which had been passed
| prior to the making OF the treaty Of
| 1871 and independently remained in
force and ever since the abroga-
ton of the treaty, and notwithstand the re-
| fusal of Canada TO permit our fishermen 10 send
| their fish TO their home market through her
territory in bond, the people OF that Dominion
| have enjoyed without diminution the advan-
tsges of our liberal and generous laws. With
out oasing our complaint upon violation OF