21 



The termination of the reciprocity treaty in 1866 again brought 

 into operation the treaty of 1818, and the manner of dealing with the 

 question became a matter of much political interest in Canada. It 

 Avas evident that whatever party policy would secure, reciprocity with 

 the United States would be endorsed by the people. The system of 

 licenses which, by increasing stringency defeated itself, 3*011 are all 

 familiar with, and upon its termination it was announced by the pub- 

 lic men of Canada that not only all that could be claimed under their 

 construction of the treat}' of 1818 would be enforced, but that a Pro- 

 vincial cutter system should be inaugurated, commanded by men who 

 were in sympathy with the coercive principles of the government, 

 and who could be depended on to cause the American fishermen all 

 the trouble and annoyance possible, for the ostensible purpose of 

 forcing the United States again to r*enew the reciprocity treaty. 



The leniency of the officers of the regular British naval service to- 

 ward the fishermen was not satisfactory ; in fact the wood, water and 

 shelter clause was not to be considered in the spirit in which it was 

 made, (simply restrictive,) it was to be made aggressive; and con- 

 struing the language of the Imperial Act 59 of George III, in which 

 a vessel preparing to fish in British waters is deemed criminal, they 

 seized vessels that were buying bait to use on the Grand Banks, re- 

 stricted them from buying ice or supplies, claiming that such acts 

 were preparing to fish. I cite these things simply to show how Can- 

 ada exagerates what was intended to be a simple restrictive regula- 

 tion, into a criminal law, and also to show the supine indifference of 

 the United States in submitting to such wholesale piracy. 



True the President did issue a proclamation after Congress had 

 passed unanimously the memorial resolutions sent from this city ask- 

 ing for a declaration of non-intercourse if these acts were continued, 

 and doubtless some retaliatory measure would have been adopted 

 had not the proposals for the Washington treaty involving the fishery 

 question at this time appeared. The result of that treaty gave to 

 the fishermen of the United States simply the right to take fish of ev- 

 ery kind in the waters of Canada, viz., inside of three miles. We 

 acquired no commercial rights whatever. The wood, water and shel- 

 ter clause of the treat}' of 1818 still remains, and is in force to-day, 

 modified simply by the permission contained in the Treaty of Wash- 

 ington, to take fish inside of three miles. If there was virtue in Can- 



