CONGRESS. (TnE FISHERIES TKEATT.) 



223 



the place of light, insecurity in place of the firm 

 rock upon which this treaty would place the 

 rights of the American people, they can create 

 agitation in the land, but, sir, the people of 

 tlie United States are revolting against these 

 high assumptions on the part of this committee. 

 They are revolting against the idea that the 

 Senate of the United States, that can not de- 

 clare war of its own motion and by its own 

 resolution, should put this country in a cate- 

 gory where war is one of the dismal prospects 

 of the near future in the contemplation of many 

 men who are as firm in their integrity, as bold 

 in their defense of right as any on that side, 

 and who, perhaps, are just as fearless of the 

 results of war as any who have declaimed 

 against this treaty on that side. It does not 

 shame us or alarm us to look the truth in the 

 face, and to be willing to admit and act upon 

 whatever we know to be true. 



" The Senate to-day forces the people of the 

 "United States into rough and immediate con- 

 tact with the most dangerous question that can 

 possibly be stated, and that under the depress- 

 ing influence and shadow of a report which is 

 brought in here by the Committee on Foreign 

 Relations that is intended and well calculated 

 to prevent the British Government from doing 

 anything further in respect of negotiation with 

 us, except merely to find out what we mean 

 by these declarations. I repeat the remark I 

 sometimes have had occasion to make in this 

 debate, that if this were the action of the Brit- 

 ish Parliament, and if a treaty that we had ap- 

 proved or were willing to approve had been 

 laid before that Parliament by the Queen, and 

 if it had been debated as it has been debated 

 here, and if a committee of the House of Com- 

 mons had made the same report that we make 

 here in respect of the American people, if they 

 had charged us with outrageous, willful viola- 

 tions of a treaty, if they had declared that the 

 time for negotiation with us in respect of this 

 matter had passed and that this was not a fit 

 subject of negotiation, I can not be so mistaken 

 in American opinion as not to feel entirely 

 warranted in saying before the Senate to-day 

 we would accept that as a challenge to war. 



" Xow, how they may accept it is not for 

 me to say or even to conjecture, for I know 

 not. I trust in God that the events which 

 seem to lie before us, which will repeat those 

 wrongs of the past as well as cause others of 

 the same nature that are to come, about which 

 we have had so much trouble, may not be of 

 such an aggravated character as to force these 

 two great and magnificent peoples into col- 

 lision with each other about so small a matter 

 as the duty on salt fish. I trust so. 



"Will that side of the chamber pardon me 

 for saying, however, that when you have gone 

 to that extent, and when these calamities oc- 

 cur and these trials are pressing on our coun- 

 try, her interests, her feelings, her sensibilities, 

 shall all be ours, and we will march breast to 

 breast with you with the same alacrity as if 



we had never divided in opinion with you on 

 this question or any other, and what the ma- 

 jority shall decree to be the will of the Ameri- 

 can people in respect to these controversies in 

 the future shall be our will? With one united 

 voice we will go into any contest that may 

 arise, Mr. President, notwithstanding all the 

 sneers and slurs, the contumely and contempt 

 that have been thrown upon the gentlemen on 

 this side of this chamber because of their con- 

 nection with the late rebellion and their advo- 

 cacy of this treaty. We shall prove just as 

 true as you are to the flag of the American 

 Union. We will spend our money just as free- 

 ly as you do and more freely than many of 

 you have done. We have shed our blood 

 where some of you have not dared to shed it 

 in times that have passed, and you will find 

 the old spirit animating the Southern Democ- 

 racy. You will find that the man who can 

 lead the American hosts to victory in the con- 

 tests you may bring about and the wars you 

 may provoke will receive from the united 

 Democracy of the country that sort of sup- 

 port and love and affectionate reverence which 

 our fathers bestowed upon Andrew Jackson, 

 and which will cling to his memory in Demo- 

 cratic hearts in the South while time itself 

 shall last, if this shall still be a nation." 



August 21, the Senate refused to ratify the 

 proposed treaty by the following vote: 



YEAS Bate, Beck, Berry, Blackburn, Blodgett, 

 Brown, Cockrell, Coke, Colquitt, Daniel, Faulkner, 

 George, Gorman, Gray, Hampton, Harris, Jones of 

 Arkansas, MePherson, Morgan. Pasco, Payne, Pugh, 

 Ransom, Kea^an, Vest, "Walttiall, Wilson of Mary- 

 land -7. 



NAYS Aldrich, Allison, Blair, Chace, Chandler, 

 Dawes, Dolph, Edmunds, Evarts, Farwell, Frye, 

 Hale, Hawley, Hiscock, Hoar. Ingalls, Jones of Ne- 

 vada, Manderson, Mitchell, Platt, Plumb, Quav, 

 Sabin, Sawyer, Sherman, Spooner, Stewart, Stock- 

 bridge, Teller, Wilson of Iowa 30. 



ABSENT Bowen, Butler, Call, Cameron, Cullom, 

 Davis, Eustis, Gibson, Hearst, Kenna, Morrill, Pad- 

 dock, Palmer, Riddleberger, Saulsbury, Stanford, 

 Turpie, Vance, Voorhees 19. 



August 23, the President sent to the Senate 

 the following message, asking for fuller power 

 to undertake retaliation in case harsh measures 

 should become necessary in consequence of the 

 rejection of the fisheries treaty : 

 To the Congress : 



The rejection by the Senate of the treaty lately ne- 

 gotiated for the settlement and adjustment of the dif- 

 ferences existing between the United States and Great 

 Britain concerning the rights and privileges of Ameri- 

 can fishermen in the ports and waters of British North 

 America, seems to justify a survey of the condition to 

 which the pending question is thus remitted. 



The treaty upon this subject concluded_in 1818, 

 through disagreements as to the meaning of its terms, 

 has been a fruitful source of irritation and trouble. 

 Our citizens engaged in fishing enterprises in waters 

 adjacent to Canada have been subjected to numerous 

 vexatious interferences and annoyances ; their vessels 

 have been seized upon pretexts which appeared to _be 

 entirelv inadmissible, and they have been otherwise 

 treated by the Canadian authorities and officials in a 

 manner inexcusably harsh and oppressive. 



This conduct has been justified by Great Britain 



