448 HISTORY AND METHODS OF THE FISHERIES. 



matter before their Government, and ask that steps be taken, not only to make good their loss, 

 but to secure to them the enjoyment of their rights under existing treaties. 



The testimony of many of the fishermen was taken by the proper authorities, and the owners 

 on whom the loss came most heavily, on account of the expense incurred in fitting the vessels, 

 made up their claims for damages and loss amounting in the aggregate to $105,305.02. These 

 were at once forwarded to the Secretary of State, who, after examining into the evidence, promptly 

 instructed our minister at London to lay the matter before the British Government. An extended 

 correspondence ensued between the two Governments and the subject was under discussion for 

 several years. 



It was at first maintained by Her Britannic Majesty's Government that the complainants had 

 violated the provisions of local laws in three particulars: (1) The use of seines at a forbidden time; 

 (2) fishing on Sunday; (3) "burring fish." Sections 1 and 2 of chapter 102 of Title XXVII of the 

 Consolidated Statutes of Newfoundland, passed in 1872, on *. he ground of which the first and third 

 charges were made, are in the following language: 



"SEC. 1. No person shall haul, catch, or take herrings by or in a seine or other such contriv- 

 ance on or near any part of the coast of this colony or of its dependencies, or in any of the bays, 

 harbours, or other places therein, at any time between the 20th day of October and the 12th day 

 of April in any year, or at any time use a seine or other contrivance for the catching and taking 

 of herrings except by way of shooting and forthwith hauling the seine: Provided, That nothing 

 herein contained shall prevent the taking of herrings by nets set in the usual and customary man- 

 ner, and not used for in-barring or inclosing herrings in a cove, inlet, or other place. 



"SEC. 2. No person shall, at any time between the 20th day of December and the 1st day of 

 April in any year, use any nefr to haul, catch, or take herrings on or near the coasts of this colony 

 or of its dependencies, or in any bays, harbours, or other places therein, having the mokes, meshes, 

 or scales of such net less than two inches and three-eighths of an inch at least, or having any false 

 or double bottom of any description; nor shall any person put any net, though of legal-size mesh, 

 upon or behind any other net not of such size mesh, for the purpose of catching or taking such 

 herring or herring fry passing a single net of legal-size mesh." 



The assertion of the illegality of Sunday fishing was based upon section 4 of chapter 7 of an act 

 passed April 26, 1876, entitled "An act to amend the law relating to the coast fisheries," which 

 provided that 



"No person shall, between the hours of 12 o'clock on Saturday night and 12 o'clock on Sunday 

 night, haul or take any herring, capelin, or squid with net, seines, bunts, or any such contrivance 

 for the purpose of such hauling or taking." 



Secretary Evarts, in his instructions of August 1, 1879, to Mr. Welsh, the American minister 

 at London, claimed that, by virtue of the provisions of Articles XVIII and XXXII of the treaty of 

 1871. the fishermen of the United States had an unlimited and uulimitable right to prosecute the 

 fisheries in the waters of Newfoundland and other North American British provinces during the 

 period therein specified; that such was the intent of the two Governments at the time of its pro- 

 mulgation, and that it was for this privilege, which Great Britain had asserted to be more valuable 

 than the equivalent offered in the treaty, that the immense sum of $5,500,000 had been paid by the 

 United States under the Halifax award. To substantiate her position our Government brought 

 forward extracts from the statement of Her Majesty's case presented to the Halifax Commission, 

 and from the arguments of British counsel before that body, which showed their interpretation of 

 the terms of the treaty to be substantially identical with that now maintained by the United States. 

 He claimed that the American fishermen had not interfered in any way with the rights of British 



