~~ 
e 
45 | 
| = Murphy & Andrews to take down their factory, 
aining till the order was obeyed. Upon its site another 
ory was erected by the French, but it was subsequently 
doned. After its erection the Government of Newfoundland 
ted to collect duties upon the materials imported to erect 
operate the factory, but the French refused to pay, claiming 
at under the treaties they had the right to import all’ they 
a in the prosecution of their fishery rights. The facts of 
ease were drawn to the attention of the British Giant, 
Shy the then Governor of the colony, and also by an 
s from the Legislature of Newfoundland, printed as 
endix Eo 4 
e satisfaction vouchsafed will be ascertained by perusal of a 
Bich from the Secretary of State, printed as Appendix iF. In 
f, that despatch meant, that, though Her Majesty’s Govern- 
it denied that the French had any right to take lobsters and 
4 factories, yet, as the declaration of 1783 promised to remove 
ements” which should be formed upon the coasts over 
wh the French had treaty rights, the removal of the; factory 
sa justifiable action. ‘The despatch was misleading, and 
mitted to notice several most important points, In the first 
ace, a factory is not a “settlement” within the meaning of the 
eaties. In the second place, the declaration of 1783 did not 
daix the removal of settlements to gratify the mere eaprice of 
ie French, but for the purpose of preventing British subjects 
from interrupting in any manner, by their competition, the 
ery of the French.” Now, the factory of Messrs. Murphy & 
l ews was not “interrupting ” the French “by their eompeti- 
1,” because (1) it had not.commenced operations when its 
val was enforced; (2) the French were not,"and had not 
en; carrying on a fishery to be interrupted ; and (3) the lobster 
ing which the French proposed to carry on is held by the 
h Government not to be a “fishery” at all, and con- 
ently not free under the treaty from interruption. Messrs, 
hy &. Andrews, in erecting a factory in 1888, were only 
as Messrs. Forrest & Shearer had done in 1882 and 1883 
it thout let or hindrance by either French or English. Nothing 
s said about the fact that the French had evereised a terri- 
i right not conferred by treaty in erecting a factory upon 
> soil of Newfoundland, Nothing was said of their exercise 
