58 
“ was to the effect that the ‘consent of the community of New- { 
“*<foundland was regarded by Her Majesty's Government as an 
i 
“ ‘essential preliminary to any modification of their territorial or _ 
“ «maritime rights. The modus vivendi obviously does not | 
“ affect any such modification, and Her Majesty’s Government 
‘can only hope that it will be accepted and acted upon loyally — 
* by the people of Newfoundland for the approaching season. 
** In the meantime, every effort will be made by Her Majesty’s 
“ Government to come to some more definite settlement of the — 
** question.—I have the honour to be, Sir, your most obedient 
“ humble servant, 
“ KNUTSFORD.” 
NEW COMPLICATIONS ARISE. 
Another question bearing directly upon the lobster industry 
has been brought before the Legislature of Newfoundland since 
4 
| 
rn 
& 
the adoption of the modus vivendi. In 1889 the Legislature © 
enacted a law creating a Fisheries Commission, amongst the duties 
of which was the preparation of regulations for the prosecution of 
the fisheries and the lobster industry, which regulations were to be — 
reported to the Legislature, and would become law upon the ~ 
adoption by the Legislature of a resolution confirming them. 
Since the opening of the present session of the Legislature, a — 
despatch from the Secretary of State to the Governor concerning 
the aforesaid Fisheries Commission Act has been submitted, and — 
in this despatch it is intimated that Her Majesty will be advised 
to disallow the Act unless it is amended so as to make it necessary 
to submit the regulations to the Queen in Council before they 
come into operation, so as to prevent encroachment upon, or 
{ 
ei 
i 
| 
interference with, the treaty rights of the French. The in- ~ 
tolerable and anomalous nature of French treaty rights could — 
not be better illustrated than they have been by this © 
occurrence. It is, for instance, considered necessary to regu- — 
late the size of the lobsters which may be caught for canning 
purposes, and to enforce a close season in each year, during which 
they cannot be caught at all. It would, however, be utterly — 
useless to make such laws applicable to the British pursuing the 
lobster industry upon the coasts over which the French have © 
treaty rights if the French, being permitted to continue taking © 
lobsters, were not also amenable to the same laws. Ifthe French ~ 
‘ 
i 
