New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1893-03-15
THE FRENCH SHORE TROUBLE.

Newfoundland is again agtatcd by the in
convcnicnccs of the French Shore Treaty The
enforcement act passed by the local Assembly
| under mysterious arrangement between OH
William Wbtcway, the Newfoundland Pre-
micr and the British Government has expired
nv Imitation and The Col ,nial Government l.,
aga called upon hy the Downing Street DILL
Gals 20 renew it, This the Legislature OF New
foundand shows no disposition t. do. Sir
William Whit,vay has a Trustworthy majority
for every other purpose than the passage OF
another enforcement act. But in this matter
his own party rebels, and has finally met his
imrassioncd demands with an overwhelming
majority denying them. The Legislature claims
that in passing the original enforcement act II
wa, deceived, even trckcd. into the belief that
Great Britain would relieve it of the treaty, or
at least allow the court Interpreting 1t To be
composed Of Newfoundland judges. II VIII NJ
| longer agree 10 be it, own eXecutioncr. II the
| French shore outrage i t. be indefinitely con-
tended. il will be with the consent OF the
colony
| In taking this position the colonial lcgls-
latois lave acted with II more than Ordinary
| prudence and common sense. The claims CT
| France upon the coast of Newfoundland are
vigorously opposed by them because the
situation in view of which they were allowed
no lcnqcr exist. but has been replaced. by
| time and circumstances over which no man or
body Of men had control. with another situa-
| ton that renders the admission OF such aims
| int !erablc hurtful TO the pc pie OF Newlound-
| land in their daily occupation. and preventive
| # even a fair enjoyment Of the none too gen
/ l.. -. |. al .n1
them. Moreover, France makes no use of the
rights she claims. She does not fish in the
| waters Of the west shore because there arc no
fish there. Her fishermen do not land on the
shore - dry their fish, because they have no
fish t, dry. They do not cut timber, because
| they have n use for it, All their alleged
| right, arc out Of date and Of no practical avail.
| Their claim is pcrpctuated for no other pur-
pose than % force the Observation-Disclosures TO
supply ihcm with bait FIR use in the bank fish
cry undor conditions which would give them a
great advantage for tho sale Of their fish over
the Observation-Disclosures themselves in all the Eu-
ropcan markets.
| Great Britain has 1T dealt with her oldest
colony in the matter of this treaty fairly or
frankly 1t would bo easily possible t. get ri |
of il. The trouble is that the British Govern
mcnt is studiously and wrongfully subordi,
| na ing the inter sis of Newfoundland to tn sc
| If Canada. Had the Blaine Bond Treaty been
ratified the French Shore question would have
been settled, and Newfoundland would have
been free of the incubus that weighs so heavily
upon her prosperity Newfoundland would
have had market in the United states for
her fishery products more valuable than the
market she is now compelled t. share under
cxaspcrating conditions with the French. The
refusal to allow the Observation-Disclosures to make
the most of their opportunity is especially cruel
because it is founded on the fiction that their
interests in the fisheries are no greater than
Canada's. and that both, in their relations with
| the United States, should DO equally consid-
cred. The little colony in the sea is thus being
ground between two millstoncs. and she is il,
no condition to stand such outrageous treat