Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1888-08-30
THE PRESIDENT CRAwFISHEs.

on the fisheries question is very fine
example of executive crawtishing. When
fishery commission was first proposed
IN December, 1885. the Senate declared
against it, and on July a of the same
year instructed its committee on For
eign Relations to report bill for the
protection of American fishermen. Fol
lowing this action the Canadian author
tiles stringently and oppressively en-
forced the most offensive regulations
against the American fishing vessels.
This continued until in February, 1897,
a retaliatory bill passed the Senate by a
vote of 46 to l, and subsequently in the
House by vote of 246 TO l, and was
approved by the President. This bill
gave the President power at his discre-
tion to issue proclamation prohibiting
any Canadian vessel, unless in distress,
to enter our ports if the seizures and un-
just determinations against American
vessels continued; and also, if deemed
necessary, to prohibit the entry of Cana
llldl ISL llllO dliN VI Jul puts.
In this bill there was and is ample
power for retaliation in kind of the most
effective character Had the President
acted upon it the Canadian authorities
would have been brought to their senses
at once and their offensive regulations
and seizures would have been abandon
ed. But instead of doing this he ig-
nored the action of the Senate, with
which the executive shares the treaty
making power, and appointed commits
sioners to agree with Great Britain upon
a treaty. The result of this was treaty
which abandoned, substantially, all the
rights we have contended for years,
and in return for a few pFicilegeS, less in
value, than those we freely accorded not
only to the Canadians but to every other
people, is allowed the entry free of duty
of Candian fish into all our ports, re-
mission of duties to the extent of nearly
Sl,0O0,000 year, just what the Canadi-
ans have been fighting for since 1873.
This treaty has been rejected by the
Senate, wisely and patriOtically. The
Senate stands just where Congress stood
unanimously in February, 1887, affirm
ing our rights aad maintaining the prio-
Heges that the Canadian Government in
comfy and equity ought to guarantee
US in return for what we have freely
conceded in the way of commercial op
pOrtunitieS.
This action of the Senate throws the
administration back upon the retaliation
law which ought to have been enforced
long before this. For his unpatriotic
surrender to the wiles of British and
Canadian negotiators the President has
received ell-deServed slap in the face.
The weakness of his diplomacy having
been exposed and rebuked, he seeks
hole to crawl out of, and now sends a
message to Congress asking for the pass
age of bill directing him to suspend
the transportation of goods in bond be-
tween the two countries and put an end
to trade and transportation in which
hundreds of millions of American capi- |
tai are invested He asks Congress to |
pass bill to permit him to cut off the
American nose to spite the American
face. That is just what the Senate re-
fused to do in February. 1887, when the
retaliation bill went to a conference
committee, and it will not do it now
The law now in force is ample for the
emergency, and the President should act |
upon it. 1t is his own fault that he is |
now in position where he must back |
down and carry out the wise policy of |
the Senate or make contemplate ex-
hibitiOn of cOwardice. He is not enti-
tied to particle of sympathy, and Con-
greSs should not pass any bill to help
him out of his embarrassing position.
Neither is it necessary. Shut the Cana
dian vessels out of our ports and stop
the importation of Canadian fish, which |
he is already authorized to do, and the
question will settle itself very quickly.
Retaliation in kind is the only policy
that is ever likely to settle the question.
BY the treaty of 1918, the only one now
in force, we abandoned 'forever" any
right or privilege to take dry, or cure
fish within three marine miles of any of
the coasts or bays of the British prov
inces. 1t was a fool bargain on our
part but we must live up to it. The
Canadian authorities have an undoubt-
ed right to seize and forfeit any vessel
contravening this stipulation. They
have also the right to forbid any Ameri-
can vessel of any kind to enter Cana
dian port, except in distress, and we
have the same right. The Canadians are
using their technical rights in an un-
and oppressive way to pry open
our markets for the free entry of their
fish. There are no chalk marks or mile
stoues around the Canadian coast mark
ing the three-mile limit, and uninten-
tiOnal violations of the rule are doubt
less frequent In these cases all
doubts are construed against Amer
lean fishermen; and every opportunity
is taken to annoy and embarrasS them
in the exercise of such privileges as are
conceded. In regard to our
rights, as distinguished from our priUi-
Ieges, there are disputes also which get
our fishermen into trouble. The treaty
just rejected disposed of all controversy
as to these rights by abandoning them,
a very easy way of avoiding trouble.
Both our rights and our privileges can
be maintained and very quickly secured
by an exercise of rights that nobody de-
MES. We cannot compel the Canadians
to be just and friendly, but we can re-
4uire all their vessels and fish to keep
out of our Atlantic ports, and any others
we see fit; and within year after issu-
ing such proclamation they will be SUI
ing for settlement of the whole diff
Guilty on reasonable terms.
The aWe-Struck audience gazed
On the figure gaunt and gray;
Twas the murdered king, or the ghost
of him,
And Hamlet was the play.
His hour was brief he said,
TJa rn1ct rro ora Enbf of daV