New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1890-06-23
JU,STIF FYING HIS ACTION.
TALK WITH THE COMMANDER OF 1llE
FRENCH WARSHIP INDRE.
no VIOLENCE USED, HE SAYS, IN REMONlNo
BRITISH NETs-How THE LAW WAS con-
sTRUED-FIsH FISH, SAYS HE.


sTRUED-FIsH is FISH, SAYS HE.
Halifax, n S. June 22.-An interview with the
commander Of the French warship lndrc IS pnb-
lslIed at St. Johns, Newfoundland. II was from
this vessel that an officer went on shore al Bay
ST. George TO compel British subjects to take mp
their nets 10 make room for French fishermen
The interview is reported as follows:
Are the accounts of the friction which re-
Gently took place OH the French shore as re-
ported rue?
There is a germ of truth in them, but they
are fearfuy exaggerated and ovcrdla"h' Oho
of these accounts states that an armed crew
landed. patrolled the shore and took up Usher
mems nets Only one officer went on sholc Tor
the purpose, and he acted rs quietly rs possible.
Did YOU think you exceeding your rights,
as allowed by the treaty, in thus ordering britlsh
subjects 10 remove their nets
No: as translate it, the first and principal
right of fishing belongs 10 the French, ana IL Is
perfectly within the province of French rights
TO order the removal of nets OF any Brltlsh SUB
iccts that may interfere with them. Newfonnd-
land takes different view of the matter, nut the
treaty is plain on this point to any persons who
read it,
DO YOU think that fish other than Goldfish
come under the meaning of the treaty."
Il think fish is fish, and though British sub
iects miaht argue that there was no such thing
as lobster fishing OIL the French shore at the time
the treaty was made. still France cannot br
preven,ed from or blamed for translatlng fish
in the broadcast sense and going into lobster
fishing"
Did your men act in any hostile spirit TO the
inhabitants of the French shore during the un-
pleasantncss this spring?'
On the contrary they had strict instructions
to act quietly, though firmly. They felt they had
O duty 10 perform, 10 uphold what they considered
q national right, and though they could not be
deferred from doing that duty they did 1t with as
little discomfort and inconvenience 10 British
subjects as possible. As for the reports OF any
friction between my men and fishermen on the
coast may say there was none the owners oil
the nets which was forced 20 order 10 be removed
taking them up promptly. The whole circum-
stances Of the case were grossly exaggerated, for
what reason ! am a loss 20 conceive.
So then there was really no reason for sending
those messages in which there were reported ont
RACES -
No The position this spring waS neither better
nor worse than ever before French fishermen
ONLY claimed the same right always right
which France will insist upon their getting under
existing treaties We are surprised al the noise
that has been made, hut do not think that all
the talk will materially affect the position.
DO YOU believe III an ultimate anicahe settle
menf of the question -
Il believe that everything is amicabe enough
now if people who know nothing about tie actual
facts Of the case would not interfere.
You believe that. right or wrong. the Imperial
Government made concessions - France which The
latter will hold on 20 as long rs she can, and Tor
this she can't he blamed? DO you thlhk thAt
France would accept any money condition. or ter
ritorial concessions elsewhere for her claims on
Newfoundland p"
That is n question cdnnot answer AZ present
There arc Tepor;s ahuat that France wOuld cX-
change territory. but ! would not say whether
they true or not.