The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1899-01-18
The FRENCH SHORE.
Newfoundland Gives Its Sido of, tho Con-
troyersy.

New York. Jan. ia dispatch to the
Herald from st. Johns, N. f., says:
From interviews with members of the
Newfoundland government, prominent
members Of the opposition and leading
business men of the colony, the general
opinion Of the colony's side of the dis
pute with France may be summarized
as follows:
The treaty rights are concurrent, not
exclusive. Despite British official in
depreciation of the treaties, they have
been enforced by the British authorities
according to the French Interpretation.
Newfoundland fishermen are frequently
interrupted when not interfering with
the French fishermen and their schoon-
ers driven away. They are thus de-
prived of a means of livelihood. New
foundland fishery regula tions cannot be
enforced on French shore, which means
ultimately the depletion of the fishing
grounds The disallowance of cod traps
on the treaty shore is harsh restric-
ton insisted upon by the imperial au-
thorities in the interests of the French.
The French shore fishery is valueless to
the French except for the illegal bait
ing of the French banks fleet.
The treaties refer to cod only and not
to salmon or to Holsters. HOLSTERS are
not fish, nor is timing drying" hence
the French presumptive right" to con-
duct this industry is unfounded. Apart
from this, the lobster industry is being
ruined for British and French alike by
the non enforcement of necessary reg
ulatlons. The modus vivendi forced on
Newfoundland sacrifices local to i'm
perial interests The colony does not
wish to evade the carrying out of treat
les. but asks that the British interpre-
tation be held as correct and that the
British navy be not employed to bolster
up unreasonable French claims. st
Pierre and Miquelon are the centers of
the wholesale smuggling business,
which Is doing serious damage morally
and financially to Newfoundland.
The unwarranted French claims to
British soil-the half mile limit-retard
the development of the most valuable
mineral, agricultural and numbering re-
sources of the island. In short the
French claims, as interpreted by France
and In many cases assented to YER
bally, though officially objected to by
Great Britain, are held to be injurious
to the commercial, financial and moral
interests Of Newfoundland and the
maritime provinces.
d. j. Greene, Q. c., who was former
ly premier of the colony. has given
much attention to the matter in dis
pute. He says:
I'm my opinion the imperial govern
ment inflicted great injury on New
foundland in recognizing for one mo-
ment the right of the French to prose-
cute the lobster fishery. as 1t neces-
sarily requires the erection Of factories.
There is no warrant under the treaty
for such erections. No matter what
doubts there may be as to the French
right Of fishing, however, there can be
none to warrant them preventing Brit
ish subjects from carrying on mining,
numbering or agricultural operations
upon the treaty shore, or the prosecu-
ton of the erection of wharves and
fNf ,tSnyS
of affairs cannot last much longer
without some overt act which will pre-
cipitate matters. In certain localities
the friction has been so great that It
required the forces of the combined
British and French warships on the
coast to suppress it. The settlers on
some parts Of the coast live in a state
of jeopardy. They are denied the ordi-
nary rights of colonists. All leases of
land are issued subject to conditions of
claims and the holders are liable at
any moment to dispossession at the
suggestion of the French.