Year: 1878




collar from Mr.. Murphy.


The Halifax Award To He Paid.
President Hayes hos wisely decided, in
pursuance Of the discretion vested in him
by Congress, to make a punctual delivery
of the five and half millions on the Esd
inst, and thus end the controversy respect
ing the validity of the Halifax award. The
President evinces a correct appreciation Of
good faith, and o majority of the Amer
lean people will indorse his decision.
The President is not responsible for
raising the question which has re-
Gently been in controversy between
the two governments since he was required
by Congress to make representations be-
fore paying the award. No intelligent
American doubts that the award is exorbi-
tant; but the subject was muddled by tho
treaty and worse muddled by the incompe-
tence of the men selected by our govern
ment to manage its case before the Commits
sioners. We blundered in the treaty and
blundered in the choice of our agent and



and the excessive amount Of the award is the
natural consequence and heavy penalty Of
these blunders. Had our case at Halifnx
been placed in the hands Of lawyer as
competent as Mr.. Evarts it is not probable
that any necessity would have arisen for
disputing the justice of the award.


The clumsiness of the treaty is apparent
in the fact that it made the period Of time
indefinite and yet required the award to be
gross sum. The stipulated privileges are
to run for twelve years and indefinitely
thereafter, subject to termination at any time
by either government on giving two years
notice. If neither government should give
notice the treaty may run twenty fifty,
or even hundred years. Now, it is the
plainest dictate OF business sense that when
the time during which privilege is to run
is thus expansive and elastic the compen-
sation should be equally elastic lin other
words, instead Of gross sum it should be
certain rate per annum during the exist
ence of the privilege. The same definite
sum which would be just compensation
for hundred years would be an excessive
compensation for twelve years; but, accord
ing to the treaty, while the period can
not be less than twelve years it may
extend to hundred. With nothing
but so elastic treaty to guide them how
could the mmissioners know for what
length Of time they should reckon the CON-
pensation? A gross sum for the enjoyment
of the inshore fisheries in perpetuity would
be business-like and Ineligible; gross
sum for definite twelve years would also
be business-like and ineligible, though the
sum awarded should be smaller; bat gross
sum for privilege which may run on in
definitely or stop at any time after the ex-
piration of twelve years was IN arrange
ment absurd on its face and never should
have been admitted into the treaty.


It seems to have been assumed in the re-
cent discussions that our government will
terminate the treaty at the end Of the twelve
the award. This is hasty and unreason-
able conclusion Had the award been at o
certain rate per annum during the continu-
ance of the privilege our government would,
Of course, terminate it at the earliest date
possible if it deemed it excessive. But as
the award is gross sum, to be paid once
for all. we should save nothing by giving
notice. If the treaty should run on for
twenty or fifty years we shall have nothing
additional to pay, and therefore have no
motive for terminating the arrangement,
unless the free admission Of Canadian fish
and oil is worth more than inshore fish
cries. The notice Of termination is more
likely to come from the British government.
Mr.. Evarts' able protest against the injus-
tice Of the award may, however, check this
tendency by convincing the British govern
ment that it cannot extort from US anything
worth while by putting these fisheries again
in the market