185 



By an act of parliament, passed in the reign of Edward the sixth, 

 (1547) the Newfoundland fisher) 7 had been declared an unlicensed 

 fishery, free to all the inhabitants of the realm, and in all the char 

 ters of the New-England colonies, the rights of fishings, had been 

 granted, with special reservations of the right of sharing in these 

 fisheries to all British subjects. The right &quot; to use and exercise 

 &quot; the trade of fishing upon the coast? of New-England, in any of 

 &quot; the seas thereunto adjoining, or any arms, of the said seas, or 

 &quot; salt water rivers, where they have been wont to fish,&quot; together 

 with the power to use the shores, for purposes connected with the 

 fisheries, was expressly granted much at large, in the last charter 

 of Massachusetts Bay, as it had been in those that preceded it. 

 There was a gross mistake, therefore, in the assertion that the 

 king of Great Britain might have interdicted the enjoyment of these 

 fisheries to the people of the province of Massachusetts Bay. It 

 was their birth-right, as British subjects ; it was their special right 

 as secured to them by charter ; and the British parliament it 

 self could deprive them of it, as they did, only by one of those 

 acts which provoked and justified the Declaration of Independence. 

 In March 1775, the British parliament, passed &quot; an act to restrain 

 &quot; the trade and commerce of tiie provinces of Massachusetts Bay 

 &quot; and New Hampshire, and colonies of Connecticut and Rhode- 

 c Island, and Providence Plantation, in North America, to Great 

 : Britain, Ireland, and the British islands in the West Indies ; and 

 &quot; to prohibit such provinces and colonies from carrying on any 

 &quot;fishery on the Banks of Newfoundland, and other places therein 

 &quot;mentioned, under certain conditions and limitations.&quot; 



In moving for leave to bring in this bill, lord North &quot; supported 

 &quot; his motion by declaring, that as the Americans had refused to 

 trade with this kingdom, it was but just that we should not suffer 

 them to trade with any other nation. In particular, he said that 

 the fishery on tne Banks of Newfoundland, and the other banks, 

 and all the others in America, was the undoubted right of Great 

 Britain, therefore we might dispose of them as we pleased. That 

 although the two houses had not declared all Massachusetts Bay 

 &quot; in rebellion, they had declared, that there is a rebellion in that 

 &quot;province. It was just, therefore, to deprive that province of its 

 &quot;fisheries.&quot; Hansard s Parliamentary History, vol. 18, p. 299. 



In the debates upon this bill, all the abilities and all the elo 

 quence of both parties in the British parliament were called forth. 

 On this bill Mr. Charles Fox said, &quot; that this bill must have been 

 &quot; calculated to put an end to all that remained of the legislative 

 &quot; authority of Great Britain over America. That it must be in- 

 &quot; tended to show to the colonies that there was no one branch of 

 * supreme authority which parliament might not abuse in such a 

 &quot; manner, as to render it reasonable to deny, and necessary to re- 

 &quot; sist it.&quot; Then after enumerating all their previous acts of oppres 

 sion, he added, &quot; but the British legislature is now to convince the 

 1 Americans that this power thus used, may be made by fax the 



