St. Johnsbury Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1867-1919, 1888-01-26
THE FISHERIES DISPUTE.
e. J. Carpenter in January Wide Awake.

d. -
So much has been said, of late, in the
| newspapers concerning the dispute be
tween our country and Great Britain
relative to the Fisheries" that | am
sure you will be glad to know what il
is all about. Of course you know al
ready that there are great many PEG
pie at and about Gloucester, on Cape
Ann, who make their living by fishing
1t really is an immense industry. A
large number of vessels are owned
there, which go out to "the banks" af-
ter cod and mackerel and halibut.
The "banks" are great tracts of shOal
water, where the fish chiefly cOngre-
gate. The largest of these banks is the
Grand Bank, which lies off the south
ern coast of New Foundland. The
Western Bank is off the Nova ScOtian
coast, while Jeffreys Bank and Georges
Bank are off the coast of New Eng
land.
Fishing on these banks is dangerous
business and many brave men lose
| their lives every winter in this hazard
Gus occupation. The vessels are own
ed on shore, but sometimes the cap
tain owns a share in the vessel he COM
mands. The sailors are paid a proper
tiOnal part of the profits of the voyage.
So much, in brief, for the fshing
business itself. Now about the troubles.
AS have said, the largest fishing ter
ritOry is off the coast of the British
provinces. Naturally our fishermen
wish to go to those banks. When
peace was declared between our coun-
try and Great Britain, after the War
of the Revolution, treaty was made
by which it was agreed that our fisher
men should continue to enjoy the right
to take fish on the banks of New
Foundland and along the Canadian
coast but they were not allowed to
go ashore to dry fish, except at places
where no people live, without the per-
mission of the inhabitants.
In the year 1918 another treaty was
made by this the American fishermen
were allowed to take fish on the south
ern coast of New FOundland, from Cape
Ray to the Ramean Islands and on the
western and northern coast from Cape
Ray to the Quirpon Islands also on
all the shores of the Magdalen Islands
and on the coasts and bays from Mount
Jolly, on the southern coast of Labra
dor, through the straits of Belle Isle
and nOrthwardly along the coast, so
far as they cared to go. But in all
other parts of the Canadian coast it
was agreed that our vessels should not
fish within three miles of the shore and
that they should not enter Canadian
ports, except for shelter in bad wealth
er, to repair damages, to buy wood, or
to get water. But our fishermen we're
allowed to go on shore to dry fish on
the southern coasts of New Foundland,
or on the coast of Labrador, where
there is no settlement.
Again, in 1871, another treaty was
made; by this our fishermen obtained
greater privileges, but we had to pay
for them. This is known as the "Trea-
ty of Washington" By it our fisher
men obtained the right to fish wher-
ever they chose; and, in return, Cana
dian fishermen were given the right to
fish in American waters also, the fish
of the Canadians was allowed to be
sold in our markets, without paying
any duty to the government. But the
British thought that this was not
enough to pay them for the privileges
granted to American fishermen, and so
it was agreed that the United States
should pay Il sum of money, to be fixed
by Commission. One of these Com
missioners was chosen by the United
States, another by Great Britain, and
the third by Austria. They met in
Halifax in 1877 and made an award of
five and half millions of dollars to
Great Britain.
This amount our government paid,
but with reluctance; and little later
occurred what is known as "The For
tune Bay affair" An American fishing
vessel went into Fortune Bay, on the
southern coast of New Foundland, to
catch herring for bait. The crew was
attacked by New Fonndland men and
driven off and their nets destroyed.
For this outrage Great Britain paid our
government seventy five Thousand dol
lars.
Then, in 1885, the "Washington
Treaty" was broken up, or ''abrogat-
ed," by our government, and the treaty
of 1918 of course came into force again.
The British We're loath to give up the
"Treaty of Washington" because it
gave them liberty to bring salt fish into
our ports, free of duty, and they now
are irving to force us to make new
treaty which will admit their salt fish
free, in competition with the fish of
To bring this about it is claimed that
they are vexing and troubling our fish
ermen in many ways; that they have
armed vessels cruising about and if
they find one of our vessels within
three miles of the shore, even if the
crew are not fishing, they seize the
vessel and give the owners much
trouble; that sometimes they detain
the vessels for long time and then
only let it go by paying large fine !;
that if vessel goes mo a Canadian
port to get wood, or water, or for shell
ter (Which things are allowed by the
treaty. they seize or sietain her and
make II great deal of trouble /; that they
will not allow our vessels to enter their
ports and send fish home by railroad so
they can go for another catch.
The British claim that "three miles
from the coast" means three miles from
the furthest point of the coast; that is,
they say that it means IL line drawn
three miles off the headlanis. Our
fishermen claim that it means a line
drawn along the shape of the coast.
So there the dispute now stands.
Sometime ago Congress gave the Pres
ident power To retaliate, by denying
Canadian vessels the privileges of our
ports. But this lie has not done. He
has, however, appointed William H..
Putnam of Portland, Me-, and James b.
Angel. of Ann Arbor, Mich, to meet
British Commissioners and settle the
question, and these English Commits
sioners have already arrived.