The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1890-04-02

to largely reduce their catch of fish. The
bait act, though it has encountered some
opposition from the men who used to gain a
livelihood by furnishing the French with
bait, is sustained by the great majority of
the colonists. OF course the effect of these
manGuvreings has been to create good deal
OF bitterness between the colonists and the
French, and probably the latter have been
subjected to considerable petty persecution.
Yetthe Frenchmen have managed to hold
their own, and lately by means of an ar
rangement with England, have won a de.
cioed victory. When the treaty of 1888 was
agreed to. the canning of Holsters was un-
known and unthought of. 1t could be very
reasonably contended that the French got
no right to engage in that sort of business
along the Newfoundland coast. But the
French government has recently made an
arrangement with England by which they do
get that right, temporarily at least, and in
consequence French lobster canning estab-
lishments are springing up all along the
Newfoundland coast much to the dismay of
the colOnists. who allege that England has
wantonly sacrificed their rights to foreign
nation without even consulting them, and
has taken the whole coast out of the hands
of the local officers and placed it under the
control of an English and French naval Of
fcer. The st. Johns Herald thus voices the
objections of the Newfoundlanders to the
latest arrangement or mOdus viuendi
We object to the modus vivendi because it was
concluded without our knowledge and consent
for we most earnestly contend that our rights
should not be mortgaged without our approval
first given The mOdns viyendi was commenced,
carried o. and conducted without our consent
without our knowledge, without our approval
We have been treated like cattle, auctioned off to
the French at low price, as Il we were not worth
done in this country would not be attempted with
any other sef-goyerned British dependency and
II attempted would cause revolution.
I'VE were promised in 1857-by the famous La
Douche dlspatch1that nothing should be done to
preludice our rights without our consent and up
to date that promise has been faithfully kept
The 1885 arrangement arrangement with France
was submitted to us and rejected. Assent to the
BAH act was refused in 1886 but conceded in
was submitted for our approval in 1885 and ac.
cepted. No precedent exists for the outrageous
dlsrespect shown to us in this latest affair and the
cause is nard TO understand, except it be that
some persons In authority have undertaken in adj
vance TO secure for the arrangement the slavish
spproval Of the Legislature as now formed We
outrageous terms in themselves the best evidence
81 tots she gross Ignorance of British diploma
French. The initial objection is that the mere
1act OF making any arrangement cast DOUBT on
our exclusive right to all the Holsters on the So
called French Shore as to which no doubt i'm
reality exists In the minds of British LAWYERS and
BRITISH statesman. The admission of such a
AFTER e 'o7
Tine second objection is that territorial right
IS ceded TO the French-temporary it NAV be, but
nsVertneless very real, and possibly permanent
Inc treaties declare that the French shall only be
alloWed 70 erect temporary 'huts necessary and
used for the drying of fish,, but the four French
LOBSTER factories already established are much
more permanent structures than those described,
ana could not be maintained on our coast under
the terms of the treaties
The third objection is that dual naval con-
lrOl is set up over our coasts our factories aud
our people. They are to be controlled by whom?
NOT by the Government and officials of this col
ony. Dut by French and British officer Jointly.
we talk OF the west coast as ours, and point to
our customs officers, our magistrates, and our
representatives In the legislature for proof But
IS IL ours? The fish is not ours the salmon is NOT
ours the Holsters are not ours the factories are
not ours, the laborers in them are not ours-not
ours to control, that for they are all hereafter
TO be dealt with by naval officers, and over them
Frenchman Is to have power the Government
OF this colony and all its officials dare not exer-
else. The fourth objection is that the terms are
Intentionally framed SO as to induce their own
GO ntlnuation and to make permanent that which
processes to be only temporary"