New-York tribune., 1890-06-12

stood upon the conclusion of the Treaty Of YER
saiDes, and all subsequent attempts 70 ws%nr} wy}
them have been rejected by the colonial auunoii
ties as worse than existing conditions treaty
was arranged in 1897, but It's reception az -su Sv
Johns was so violent that the Enghsn wthutew ..
from il. Another was drawn up IN 1882 puo ~
met q like fate In each of these the frenc.
shore privilege was enlarged despite the lact .nae
for seventy years the colonists nave CONSISTENCY ~
declared that they must and VIII De mas.eiS III U
their own tcrritcry This has always been the
rock upon which negotiation has met disaster.
Within the last three years an enureE oS neM
question has arisen. For some reason inc rrencn
shore fishery has been declining since 1850. In
that year the catch was valued at $3o0,ooo' put
last year it pursued by less than dozen , YES
il. The bulk of the French fleet has gone over
to the Banks, where their catch has risen from
400. 900 quintals in 1881 to 100000 IN iss6.
Within this same decade the Newfoundlanaers
have been turning their attention to lobster catch
ino and canning The best lobster fisheries are
off the French shore and numerous factories nave
there been established by the colonistS: Inc In,
dustry first came into prominence in 1883, when
S5O,597 was realized from 1t. It's value mas
steadily increased, that in 1883 1t realized no
less than $3s5077. In 1887 the French, az
tracted by this new opportunity: began 10 eaten
HOLSTERS and to can them, and although hitherto
they had not professed to discover any invasion
of their treaty rights in the lobster operations OF
the coonists, they now began to insist mat y
was their exclusive industry, that the British
factories ought to come down and that no new
ones should he constructed: The coonlsts retail
pens that the caplin and squids which are used
as bait for the cod-fshery are to be found only
along the British shore. The French have OBJ
tanned their bait by purchase from the Newfound-
landers This bait act was practically prohlbl-
tive. and it operated to reduce the french caGm
in 1887 to less than 800 900 quintals. 1t is still
in force with results highly embarrassing to the
fishermen of st. Pierre Meanwhile the lobster
controversy RACES The French on several occa.
sons have forcibly prevented the erection ot
British lobster factories and have seriously I'M
peded the profitable conduct of those already
going The colonists angrily inquire by what
treaty provision they have obtained this right:
They Significantly point to the second clause OF
King Georges Declaration and ask II the French
think that Holsters are fish" and that canning
is "dryincr: and, in that event, whether the
lobster.fshery is the fishery spoken OF in 1888
as the one (which has at all times been acknowi
edged" for to that fishery are their rights re-
French diplomacy however has been too
much for Lord Salisbury. NJ. Spuller has
wrested modus vivendi from the British
Premier which, although processing. to reserve
q the question of principle and OF respective
rights distinctly comedies the French claim III
provides that Z" no lobster factories not in opera,
tion on the first Of last July shall be permitted
except by the joint consent OF the French ana
British naval commanders in Newfoundiand ana
that for every new factory conceded to the BRUSH
subject another must I've allowed to the French
citizen The Newfoundlanders want very mucn
70 know how Lord Salisbury supposes he can re-
serve a thing which he has just given away HIS
mind was in Egypt, they say, and not in New
foundland when he agreed to this modus,