260 



DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE AND FOREIGN RELATIONS. 



can commissioners, but that, if free fish and 

 fish-oil were conceded, they would inquire of 

 their Government whether they were prepared 

 to assent to a reference to arbitration as to 

 money payment. 



The American commissioners replied that 

 they were willing, subject to the action of 

 Congress, to concede free fish and fish-oil as 

 an equivalent for the use of the inshore fish- 

 eries, and to make the arrangement for a term 

 of years ; that they were of opinion that free 

 fish and fish-oil would be more than an equiva- 

 lent for those fisheries, but that they were also 

 willing to agree to a reference to determine 

 that question and the amount of any money 

 payment that might be found necessary to 

 complete an equivalent, it being understood 

 that legislation would be needed before any 

 payment could be made. 



The subject was further discussed in the con- 

 ferences of April 18th and 19th, and, the British 

 commissioners having referred the last proposal 

 to their Government and received instructions 

 to accept it, the treaty articles XVIII. to XXV. 

 were agreed to at the conference on the 22d 

 of April. 



AETICLES XXVII. TO XXXIII. 



At the conference on the Gth of March the 

 British commissioners proposed that the reci- 

 procity treaty of June 5, 1854, should be re- 

 stored in principle, and that, if any considera- 

 ble modifications in the tariff arrangements in 

 force under it were made, the coasting-trade 

 of the United States and of her Britannic 

 Majesty's possessions in North America should 

 be reciprocally thrown open, and that the 

 navigation of the river St. Lawrence and of 

 the Canadian canals should be thrown open 

 to the citizens of the United States on terms 

 of equality with British subjects. 



The American commissioners declined this 

 proposal, and in the subsequent negotiations 

 the question of the fisheries was treated by 

 itself. 



At the conference on the 17th of March the 

 Joint High Commission considered the subject 

 of the American improvement of the naviga- 

 tion of the St. Clair Flats. 



At the conference on the 18th of March the 

 questions of the navigation of the river St. 

 Lawrence and the canals and the other subjects 

 connected therewith were taken up. 



The American commissioners proposed to 

 take into consideration the question of transit 

 of goods in bond through Canada and the 

 United States, which was agreed to. 



The British commissioners proposed to take 

 into consideration the question of opening the 

 coasting-trade of the lakes reciprocally to each 

 party, which was declined. 



On the proposal of the British commission- 

 ers, it was agreed to take the question of trans- 

 shipment into consideration. 



The British commissioners proposed to take 

 into consideration the reciprocal registration 



of vessels, as between the Dominion of Canada 

 and the United States, which was declined. 



At the conference on the 23d of March the 

 transshipment question was discussed and post- 

 poned for further information, on the motion 

 of the American commissioners. 



The transit question was discussed, and it 

 was agreed that any settlement that might be 

 made should include a reciprocal arrangement 

 in that respect for the period for which the 

 fishery articles should be in force. 



The question of the navigation of the river 

 St. Lawrence and the canals was taken up. 



The British commissioners stated that they 

 regarded the concession of the navigation of 

 Lake Michigan as an equivalent for the con- 

 cession of the navigation of the river St. Law- 

 rence. 



As to the canals, they stated that the con- 

 cession of the privilege to navigate them in 

 their present condition, on terms of equality 

 with British subjects, was a much greater 

 concession than the corresponding use of the 

 canals offered by the United States. 



They further said that the enlargement of 

 the canals would involve the expenditure of a 

 large amount of money, and they asked what 

 equivalent the American commissioners pro- 

 posed to give for the surrender of the right to 

 control the tolls for the use of the canals, either 

 in their present state or after enlargement. 



The American commissioners replied that, 

 unless the "Welland Canal should be enlarged 

 so as to accommodate the present course of 

 trade, they should not be disposed^ to make 

 any concessions ; that in their opinion the 

 citizens of the United States could now justly 

 claim to navigate the river St. Lawrence in 

 its natural state, ascending and descending, 

 from the forty-fifth parallel of north latitude, 

 where it ceases to form the boundary between 

 the two countries, from, to, and into the sea ; 

 and they could not concede that the navigation 

 of Lake Michigan should be given or taken as 

 an equivalent for that right ; and they thought 

 that the concession of the navigation of Lake 

 Michigan and of the canals offered by them 

 was more than an equivalent for the conces- 

 sions as to the Canadian canals which were 

 asked. They proposed, in connection with a 

 reciprocal arrangement as to transit and trans- 

 shipment, that Canada should agree to enlarge 

 the Welland and St. Lawrence Canals, to make 

 no discriminating tolls, and to limit the tolls 

 to rates sufficient to maintain the canals, pay 

 a reasonable interest on the cost of construc- 

 tion and enlargement, and raise a sinking fund 

 for the repaying within a reasonable time the 

 cost of enlargement ; and that the navigation 

 of the river St. Lawrence, the Canadian canals, 

 the canals offered by the United States, and 

 Lake Michigan, should be enjoyed reciprocally 

 by citizens of the United States and by British 

 subjects. This proposal was declined by the 

 British commissioners, who repeated that they 

 did not regard the equivalent offered by 1ho 



