109 



For, in the summer of 1815, the year after the conclusion of the 

 peace, her armed vessels on the American coast warned all Ame 

 rican fishing vessels not to approach within SIXTY MILES of the 

 shores. 



It was this incident which led to the negotiations which termi 

 nated in the convention of 20th October, 1818. la that instru 

 ment the United States have renounced forever, that part of the 

 fishing liberties which they had enjoyed or claimed in certain parts 

 of the exclusive jurisdiction of the British provinces, and within 

 three marine miles of the shores. This privilege, without being of 

 much use to our fishermen, had been found very inconvenient to the 

 British : and, in return, we have acquired an enlarged liberty, both 

 of h shing and drying fish, within the other parts of the British ju 

 risdiction, forever The first article of this convention affords a 

 signal testimonial of the correctness of the principle assumed by 

 the American plenipotentiaries at Ghent ; for, by accepting the 

 express renunciation of the United States, of a small portion of the 

 privilege in question, and by confirming and enlarging all the re 

 mainder of the privilege/orerer, the British government have im 

 plicitly acknowledged that the liberties of the third article of the 

 treaty of 1783 had not been abrogated by the war, and have given 

 the final stroke to the opposite doctrine of Mr Russell. That worda 

 of perpetuity in a treaty cannot give that character to the en 

 gagements it contains, is not indeed a new discovery in diplomatic 

 history ; but that truism has as little concern with this question, 

 as the annulment of our treaty of 1778 with France, so aptly ap 

 plied to it in his letter. It is not, therefore, the word forever, in 

 this convention, which will secure to our fishermen, for all time, 

 the liberties stipulated and recognised in it ; but it was introduced 

 by our negotiators, and admitted by those of Great Britain as a 

 warning that we shall never consider the liberties secured to us by 

 it, as abrogated by mere war. They may, if they please, in case 

 of a war, consider the convention as abrogated, but the privileges 

 as existing, without reference to their origin. But they and we, I 

 trust, are forever admonished against the stratagem of demanding a 

 surrender, in the form of notify ing a forfeiture. They and we are 

 aware, forever, that nothing but our own renunciation can deprive 

 us of the right. 



The second article of this same convention affords a demonstra 

 tion equally decisive, how utterly insignificant and worthless, in the 

 estimation of the British government, was this direfully dreaded 

 navigation of the Mississippi. The article gives us the 49th pa 

 rallel of latitude for the boundary, and neither the navigation of the 

 river, nor access to it, was even asked in return. 



These are conclusive facts facts appealing not to the prejudices 

 or the jealousies, but to the sound sense and sober judgment of 

 men. Without yielding at all to Mr. Russell, in my &quot; trust in God 

 and the valour of the West,&quot; 1 have an equal trust in the same di 

 vine being, as connected with the justice of the \Vet. I have the 



