The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1890-06-19
THE NEWFOUNDLAND TROUBLE.
French Rights on the Lobster C0ast-An
lrreconciiable Strife.
New York Sun.

French Rights on the Lobster Coast-An
IrreconciiabIe Strife.
New York Sun.
Let US sum up as briefly as possible the
antecedent history of this question. By
the treaty of Utrecht IN lT1s there Sefe RI ;
served TO France certain rights overa por-
ton of the Newfoundland coast known as
the French Shore. The pffraseology re-
citing these rights was repeated and con-
firmed by all the treaties OF the eighteenth
century; and by those Of lsl4
and 1915. although the bound
were varied in 1888 Unfortunately, the
language defining the French rights was
ambiguous and has lent itself to. widely
different constructions. The French con-
tend that by the terms of the treaty they
enjoy an exclusive right OF fishery between
Cape ST. John and Cape Ray, pass
ing round the north OF the is and.
and that all British fixed settlements
on the intervening coast are contrary
to the international compact On the
other hand. the Newfbundlanders maintain
that they have a concurrent right Of fishery
so long as they do not interfere with the
fishery of the French; and that while they
have no right to fixed fishing settlements
on the French shore. they have q right to
fixed settlements OF any other kind They
France by the treaty of Utrecht to
catch fish, and to dry them on the
French shores. does not include
a right of erecting lobster-canning
factories, for HOLSTERS are not fish. and can
ming Is not drying. Another grievance, on
which the Observation-Disclosures lay stress, is
the bounty OF eight shiliings and sixpence
per French hundred weight, or qufntal, re-
ceived by the French fishermen from their
government This bounty. II is maintained,
violates the terms of the treaties STIMULATING
that he mole OF conducting the fisheries
shall be the same as heretofore inasmuch
as, al the time OF signing the treaties. no
bounty was in exisience: The Newfound-
landers accordingly demand not only that
the treaties shall receive the construction
which they put upon them, bat that even
the treaty rights conceded by themselves
10 the French shall be deemed suspended
until the bounty is rescinded
tits obvious that the claims of the opposed
parties are irreconciiable. and the conflict
OF construction has led TO frequent coils
ion between the French and the Newfound-
landers. Riots have repeatedly been
caused by the election of the latter from
French drying places: and even when
British subjects have occupied por-
tons of the French coast no, taken
UP by French establishments the
French have turned them cut by force.
MANY eNuls> nave Dcsn u ale tCsput al end
% this dispute by conventions agreed upon
between England and France, but these
have been rejected by the Newfoundland
legislature on the ground that they pre-
sen,ed no satisfactory solution of the aues-
ton at issue. The arrangement made. for
instance, in Paris five years ago was repudi-
ated by the Observation-Disclosures, who held
that tue French concessions were iliusory.
and that the English had been overreached
by the superior local knowledge of the
French negoiiatoro The position now
AIKEN by the Newfoandlanders is that the
present British government has over
stepped its rights in concluding q converi-
ton with France relating to Newfoundland.
which is 10 be valid for the present sea-
son independently OF the acquies-
cence OF the colonial legislature.
This convention toleTates Tor this
season the lobster factories which were
operated By the French during 1850. and
also sanctions the erection Of an indefinite
number o other factories Daring the pres
eat year. Ii Is pointed out that precisely
Tue same concessions were made bv Eng
land TO France in 1857, bat were With
drawn owing 10 the opposition o:
the people of Newfougdi At
that time the British government
covenanIed that no arrangement should be
made III the iutares without the consent OF
the newfoundland legislature There is no
doubt that this covenant has been broken
by Lord salisbury, and hence the exaspey-
atom OF the Newfoundland people