BAIT-FISH EXPANSION AND CONFLICT 223 



of constables, of sub-collectors of Customs, of post officials, 

 and of Commissioners for issuing mesne process was 

 already at work at St. George Bay, the Bay of Islands, 

 Bonne Bay, Flower's Cove, and St. Anthony in 1881 ; and 

 for a time the naval officer on the station was also invested 

 with the authority of a local magistrate. The population on 

 the Treaty shore numbered 9,000 in 1881 and 13,000 in 

 1891. and it was known beforehand that the French fishermen 

 would not recognize local law, or those who tried to enforce 

 it. The lobster was only the principal cause of strife, and 

 men wondered what would happen if attempts were made to 

 compel Frenchmen to obey the thousand and one laws in the 

 local statute-book about seines, and nets, and close times for 

 fishing, and Sunday observances, and the like. 



It was plain that the lobster was one of many influences and there 

 which were leading England and France towards war. O ther abor- 



English and French statesmen took the alarm, and in 1885 tive Anglo- 



French 

 signed a new provisional convention, which once more de- Conven- 



limited the English and French fisheries, reserving to the tton > l88 5 

 French, amongst other things, the neighbourhood of Croc, 

 St. Barbe, St. John Island, and Ingornachoix Bays, and 

 authorizing existing buildings on the reserved parts, and 

 future as well as existing establishments and buildings for 

 industries (except fishing industries) elsewhere. Dual naval 

 control was provided, each naval officer controlling those of 

 his own nation. Fishing-ships were exempt from port, 

 light, and shipping dues, and fishing necessaries were exempt 

 from import duties. Fish included fish caught on the sea, 

 but were otherwise undefined. The word lobster was not 

 even mentioned, but herring and capelin were mentioned ; 

 and the French were allowed to buy herring, capelin, and 

 other bait freely. Newfoundlanders once more rebelled 

 against the bait-clause, threw the Treaty on one side, and 

 enacted the Anti-Bait Laws of 1886 and 1887, which will be 

 presently discussed. The Treaty was not wholly waste 



