PERIOD FROM 1836 TO 1854. 529 



A correspondence on the subject took place in "Washington in 1816 

 between the Secretary of State of the United States, Mr. Monroe and 

 Sir Charles Bagot. then here, but which came to no practical result. 



In 1818 the subject was resumed in London, by Messrs. Gallatin & 

 Rush, on the part of the United States, and Mr. Robinson and Mr. 

 Gouldbourn, on the part of England; the plenipotentiaries of the 

 United States, acting under instructions from the Department of 

 State to the following effect, to wit, — " were authorized to agree to an 

 article whereby the United States will desist from the liberty of 

 fishing, & curing & drying fish, within the British jurisdiction gen- 

 erally, upon consideration that it shall be secured as a permanent 

 right, not liable to be impaired by any future war, from Cape Ray 

 to the Remea Islands, & from Mount Joli, on the Labrador coast, 

 through the Strait of Belleisle, indefinitely north along the coast ; the 

 right to extend as well to curing & drying the fish as to fishing." 



"Now it is to be observed that this instruction respects only the use 

 of the shores, and the fishing, within three miles thereof. No in- 

 struction, authority, or permission, is given to Messrs. Gallatin & Rush 

 to surrender, or qualify, in any manner whatever, the original right 

 of fishing in the seas, and Great Bays, & Gulfs, as the same had 

 already been maintained, insisted on, and acceded to, at the Treaty 

 of 1783. Nor does their correspondence show that any such surrender 

 had been made or contemplated by them, or was claimed or insisted 

 on, although it was intimated that the British Plenipotentiaries, 

 according to the idea previously expressed in Lord Bathurst's note, 

 were inclined to maintain that all the provisions of the Treaty of 

 1783, were abrogated by the war of 1812. 



This point will be considered, hereafter in this paper. At present 

 the undersigned, is speaking of the Convention of 1818, and he has 

 to remark — 



It must be taken for granted, therefore, that in all which respects 

 this part of the case, the American Commissioners meant to stand, 

 and supposed they were standing, on the original American grounds. 

 Nor is it discoverable that the British Plenipotentiaries thought 

 otherwise, for in none of the Protocols of conference, in no memo- 

 randum, nor in any communication of any other kind, do they inti- 

 mate any purpose of excluding the American Fishermen from the Bay 

 of Fundy, the Gulf of St. Lawrence, or any other Bays, basins or 

 expanses of water to which American fishermen had been in the habit 

 of resorting. On the contrary, it will be found that all their con- 



ning. 



., all 



ferences, all their conversations, and all memoranda upon the subject, 

 are confined to the fishing within the three miles from the shore, and 

 the curing & drying of fish on the shore. It is clear therefore, that the 

 word- of the Treaty are to be explained by reference to this plain and 

 indubitable understanding of the parties. The important words of 

 this Article are these: "It is agreed between the high contracting 

 parties that the inhabitants of the Baid United States shall continue 

 to enjoy unmolested, forever, (he liberty to take fish, of every kind, 

 on that part of the southern coast of Newfoundland, from the said 

 Cape Kay to Coffin II and. on the Magdalen Island-, and also on the 

 coasts, bayfi and harbor! and creeks from Mount Joli on the southern 

 eoasi of Labrador, to and through the straits of Belleisle, and thence 

 northwardly indefinitely along the coast; and that the American 

 fishermen shall also have liberty forever to dry and cure fish in any 



