Abilene weekly reflector. [volume] (Abilene, Kan.) 1888-1935, 1888-08-30

supply 10 substitute The value TO the Pomin-
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 viii be better appreciated when it is re-
membered that for a considerable portion Of
each year the St. Lawrence river, which consti-
tutes the direct avenue TO 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 our
territory under TIE privileges granted by our
laws amounted IN value 10 about S270, 0oo.00l
able under our tariff laws. BY far the larger
part of this traf1c onsisted Of exchange of
groods between Great Britain and her American
provinces. brought 70 6nd carried from our
. rts IN their own vessels The treaty stipuls
ton entered into by our Government was in
harmony with laws that were then on our
statute books and are still in force. l 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 o. goods, wares and mer
chandise m bond across or over the territory of
the United States 70 or from Canada
There need be no hesitation in suspending
these laws arising from the supposition that
their continuance is secured by treaty obliga-
tons for il seems quite plain that article 90 OF
the treaty Of 1871, which was the only article
incorporating such laws, terminated July ],
1855. The article itself declares that its pro-
visions shall be in force 'for the term Of years
mentioned in article 80 Of this treaty" Turn
ing 70 article 80 We find no mention OF the 2eth
article, but only provision that articles IS
TO IS, inclusive, and article 80 shall take
effect as soon as the laws required 70
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
4
expiration OF two years after either Of the high
contracting parties shall have given notice TO
the Their of its wish 10 terminate the same.
l am Of the opinion that the term OF years
mentioned in article go referred to in article
% as the limit to its duration means the
period during which articles IS to 81 inclusive
and article 81 commonly called the fishery
articles" shall continue in force under
the language of said article %. That the
joint high commissioners who negotiated the
treaty so understood and intended TO phrase
iscertain. 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: THE trLnsit
question was discussed and it 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 % it will be found that the law passed
by Congress to carry the treaty into effect
furnishes conclusive proof of the correctness o
such construction. This law was passed March
l. 1873 and is entitled IAN act carry into effect
the provisions Of the treaty between the
United States and Great Britain. signed in
Washington May s, 1871, relating to the
fisheries After providing in its first and
second sections for putting in operation
4 41a- a1r1CSr md fa1a
30 OF the treaty, the third section is de-
voted 30 article 90 as follows: Section 3-That
from the date Of the Presidents proclamation
authorized by the first sec ion of this act, and
so long as the articles IS TO Is inclusive and
article 80 Of said treaty shall remain in force &C.
cording 10 the terms and conditions Of article
30 of the treaty. all goods, wares and merchan-
disc arriving" etc, following in the remainder
OF the section the precise words of the stipula-
ton the part of the United States as con-
tanned IN article 90 which I have already
fully quoted. Here, then, is q distinct
enactment of the Congress limiting the
duration of this article of the treaty to the time
that articles is to S5. inclusive and arti lie
30 should continue in force. That IN fix
ing such limitation it 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 or Inconsistency between the treaty
and the act of the Congress last cited, it 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 it, section GO Of
such treaty, 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 8, 1883. declaring that in the iudg-
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 81 OF the
treaty. Such notice having been CIV
en- two years prior TO July l, 1885, the
| articles mentioned were absolutely terminated
on the last day named, and with them article %
was also terminated. If by any language used
N the joint resolution il was intended TO re-
leve section 3 OF the act of 1873 embodying ar
ticle % of the treaty from its own limitations
TO 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 our ports
and over our soil which had been passed
| 1871 and independently remained in
force and ever since the abroga-
ton OF the treaty, and notwithstanding the re-
fusal of Canada to permit our fishermen TO send
their fish to their home market through her
territory in bond, the people OF that Dominion
have enjoyed without diminution the advan-
tages OF our liberal and generous laws. With
ont basing our complaint upon violation OF
treaty obligation, it is nevertheless true that
such refusal of transit and the other injurious
acts which have been recited constitute a pro-
vobiug insistance upon rights neither mitigated
by the amenities Of National intercourse. nor
modified by due recognition of our hberality
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 of its people
without manifestation of unfriendliness, and
without the unneIghborly treatment OF our
fishing vessels of which We have justly com
planned, and whatever is done our part
should be done in the hope that the DISPOSE
ton Of the Canadian Government may remove
the occasion of q resort TO the additional ex-
ecutiye power row sought through legisls-
tive action / am satisfied that upon the prin-
ciplss that should govern retaliation. our
intercourse and relations with the Dominion
of Canada furnish no better opportunity for
its application than Is suggested by
the conditions herein presented, and
that it could not be more effectively inau gu
rated than under the power - suspension
recommended While I have expressed my
chear conviction upon the question OF the oon-
tinuance OF section % Of the treaty Of
1871, I OF course fully concede the power
and the duty of Congress in contem-
plating legislative action to construe the
terms of any treaty stipulation which might
upon any possible consideration OF good faith