Year: 1878

that three quarters Of this catch within the three
mile line and so 10 be credited TO the privilege
ceded by article 49, The United States estimate
placed the proportion at less than q quarter.
Upon the provincial claim Of three-quarters. the
product To our fishermen OF these five years OF
inshore fishing would be l25 s6 barrels II was esab
lished. upon provincial testimony. that the price
which mackerel bore in the provinces, cured and
packed ready for expectation. was So rs per barrel
and this would give as the value. cured and packed.
sum Of s47sss But in this yaIus nss sre n
cuded the barrel. the salt the expense OF
sneh m Ss Scsns sSss sns 'is pls which which ms
ures the value Of the fishery privilege is reached.
Upon the evidence 81 barrel would Be an excessive
estimate of net profit, and this would give profit to
our fishermen. from the enjoyment for these five
seasons Of the fishery privilege conceded under
whole treaty period of twelve years Of 100000
Although there would seem to be no reason
measure Of the privilege in question. vet Il L
should be pretended that the provincial value should
not be taken but the value in the market Of the United
States; and further that extravagant rate of $40
per barrel should be assumed that value and again.
beyond all bounds Of even capricious estimate
the fishing adventures. should have but $l25 900
a year. or $l5o0.0O0 for the entire twelve
ton ton of the - concession to the United States states
by article Is. undiminshed, by penny for the
concessions of the United States of articles 10 and
u. Yet this sum, thus reached, is but little more
than one-quarter of the award of the concurring
commissioners. after taking into account the deduc





The proofs disclose another wholly independent
criterion of the value Of the privilege conceded
experience Of years intervening between the
abrogation OF the Reciprocity Treaty and the negot
alton Of the Treaty Of Washington The provincial
system by which vessels OF the United
States were admitted to the inshore fishery
rated by the ton. The experience Of this system
showed that under exacton OF fifty cents per ton
fishing fleet generally took out licenses; that
when the fee was raised to 81 per ton the number Of
licenses fell of about onehalf; and when fee of So
per ton exacted but few licenses were taken out.
The fairness of this measure Of the value
of the privilege is obvious. II furnishes
compensatory rate between opposing interests sug-
and by concurring consent The tonnage, taking out
licenses under the first and lowest rate. about
thirtytwo thousand tons. Assuming. contrary to
experience that this tonnage would have borne the
highest rate of 81 per ton the sum Of S6i 900 per
in question and would have yielded for the treaty
period of twelve years $76s000. BY this method the
valuation Of the privilege OF article Is without de-
Quoting penny for the counter privileges of articles
10 and 2l would be but about fourteen per cent Of
the award of the concurring Commissioners. after
they had taken into account these privileges.


You will say then, TO Lord Salisbury that with
every anxiety to find rational explanation of the
enormous disparity between the pecuniary computa-
tons of the evidence and the pecuniary measure an
nounced by the concurring Commissioners this
has been unable to do 80 upon any other
hypothesis than that the very matter defined in article
49, and to which the proofs on both sides applied
and the very matter measured by the award Of the





similar and that such award upon this reason,
transcends the submission.


COUNTER CONCESSIONS.


The demonstration at which / have aimed appears
conclusive upon the consideration of the
cession Of article 18 to supersede far the i'm
mediate argument goes an exhibition OF the reduction
of the moderate above assigned the true
appraisal Of the concession of that article by the
mary value as laid before the commission of the
ter concessions of articles 10 and IL But brief
mentof the views OF this the treatment
Of these counter concessions in the deliberations Of the
pleteness and the frankness of this exposition In
brief, it may be said that Her Maestys government
formally insisted in their case and In their reply,
laid before the Commission. that the concession Of
article 10, whereby British subjects admitted to
the freedom Of coast fisheries north OF the thirty
ninth parallel is, TO quote the language OF the
case absolutely vslueless;" and that the
concession of article 81 admitting fish and fish oil,
the product Of the Provincial fisheries, markets
duty free, quote the language of the reply" has
not resulted in pecunary profit to the British fisher
men, but on the contrary to the American dealer or
consumer" If l have been at all successful
in showing the enormous disproportion be-
tween the sum of s5.5oo.ooo announced As
and the pecuniary value which the evidence
assigns to the concessions Of article 49, by itself
sdered need spend little time in showing that these
commissioners must have accepted the views Of Her
Majesty government that nothing was to be allowed
for countervaing value to the concessions of articles
10 and 81, or that these commissioners had in their
minds measure for the concession OF article Is,
still more inconsistent with the true treaty definition
of the subject described in that article and submitted
to the appraisernent of the commission.


II the concession of article 10 was held by these
commissioners to be absolutely yalueless."
serted in the 'Case" Of Her Majestys government,
it must have been because the pecunary profit to the
provincial fishermen of the privilege, actually
joyed by them, the true measure of estimation
Of the value Of the concession. In this view,
the immense value OF these fisheries as shown
in the evidence, all went for nothing. because
the population capital or enterprise in the Provinces
could not carry on what to them were remote fish
cries in competition with coast population.
without insisting upon the unreasonableness Of
measuring the value Of our fishing grounds by the


fishery opened to them. this disposition OF the value
Of the concession of article 10 recognizes the whole
force and res result Of the rsssoning BY which have ave
privilege of article Is, under the experience Of
the actual five years enjoyment thereof by our
fishermen, who were able to take advantage of the
privilege and did to the furthest extent compatible
with profit. The vice OF the reasoning by which
right of fshing, valuable in its capacity. is
measured by the tenants incapacity to fish. is
obvious 1t furnishes no true criterion Of the rent
cot at both under article Is and article no. Under
article 15 furnished a true criterion by the
experience of tenant confessedly willing and able
To improve the fishery to the utmost and actually
doing so.


VALUE or A PREE MARKET.


now desire you to present to Lord Salsbury's at
ton the subject of the concession OF free market
the United States for the products of the provincial
fisheries made by article II. The value of this
privilege to the provinces required by the treaty
TO be measured by the Halifax Commission and de-
dncted from their .pPra.oment of the concession Of
Of the importation under this privilege showed that at
the rate Of duty prevalent before that concession,
revenue of about $500, 600 per annum on mackerci
alone, and of more than $4,000 all kinds of fish
(mackerel included and fish oil, would have accrued
TO the United States. For the purpose of argument
conceding that but one-half of this annual sum OF
100000 should be set down pecuniary profit
to the Provincial interests, the sum of s1.s0ooOo
would need TO be deducted the OF
Article II from the true valuation Of the
privilege conceded by Article IL. II l have assigned
correctly the highest possible of the privilege
of Article IL, upon the evidence, being not more
than 81 100000 this low valuation Of the privilege Of
Article al more than extinguishes IL.


Whatever disposition the concurring Commissioners
made of this countervailing concession of Article 2l
whether they gave 1t value commensurate with
the statistical evidence of the loss TO the
United States and market gain to the provincial in
tercst considered II absolutely valueless-the mat
ter In of much moment. II these concurring
Commissioners gave tho sum of $55O0.O0O as the APP
prasement Of the concession of article 1s after de-
Quoting some $2O0O.000 for the countervailing con-
cession of article 2i the argument II to this