PERIOD FROM 1836 TO 1854. 535 



undoubted rights under treaties is one which, in this country, is not 

 materially affected by changes of ministry." Such is unquestionably 

 the case, not only in England, but in all countries where the govern- 

 ment is wisely and honestly administered. But there is always room 

 for difference of opinion what are undoubted rights, and what is the 

 best mode of asserting them. I am persuaded that Mr. Webster 

 meant nothing more, or not much more, by his remark, than was 

 meant by Lord Malmesbury himself, when he observed to Mr. Law- 

 rence that the only object of ministers at the present time was " to 

 protect the rights of the colonists in the fisheries, which had been 

 neglected by their predecessors ; " and I hope to show, in the sequel 

 of this note, that, if the predecessors of the present ministry had, as 

 Lord Malmesbury assumes been somewhat indulgent in this respect, 

 it was a wise policy, adopted for good reasons. 



Lord Malmesbury, having briefly alluded to the earlier history 

 of the discussions between the two governments, says : " Tn the year 

 1845 (should be 1843) a correspondence ensued between the British 

 and United States governments, which led to the despatch of a 

 letter from Mr. Everett, the United States minister in this country, 

 to his government dated London, 26th April, 1845. This letter has 

 been published by Mr. Webster, and is unfortunate!}' calculated to 

 cause an incorrect view to be taken of the subject by the American 

 public." 



With respect to my letter, thus characterized by Lord Malmesbury, 

 I will first observe, that it was furnished b}' me to Mr. Webster, (who 

 being then absent from the seat of government, had no access to the 

 public archives,) and was published by him for the purpose of in- 

 forming the public of what was not generally known, though an- 

 nounced at the time of is jr.. and well understood by the fishermen, 

 viz: tliat the Bay of Fundy had been formally opened to them in 

 1845. leaving the natural inference to be drawn that it was not likely 

 that it would lie closed without notice equally formal. The publica- 

 tion of my note was intended, in this way. to calm the existing ex- 

 citement, and I have no doubt contributed materially to that end. 



If the publication of my letter alone, without the rest of the corre- 

 spondence, was, as Lord Malmesbury intimate-, calculated to cause 

 :iu Incorrect view of the subjecl to be taken, it must, have operated in 

 that way for a very shorl time. My letter appeared in Boston on the 

 •jl»t of July, and on the 3d of August, the entire correspondence was 

 communicated to Congress by the President, and immediately trans- 

 ferred to the newspapers. I may add thai the only reason why Lord 

 Aberdeen's note 01 the LOth March. L845, was not furnished to Mr. 

 Webster, instead of my <>wn of the 26th of April, giving an account 

 of it. was thai my letter-books contained only my own part of the 

 con,- jpondence. 



Lord M : 1 1 1 1 1 ■ • bury jpecifies two point-, in which, as he thinks, my 



letter of the 26th April, 1845, wa calculated t<> produce an incorrecl 

 view of the subject . 



The firsl lb, that I tated th:ii Lord Aberdeen's note ,,f the LOth of 

 March, L846, conceded to American fishermen the rigbl of fishing 



within the Bay of biindv. but left doubt fid the question of other 



bays: when:! i f Lord Aberdeen's notes, to which Mr. Everett alluded, 



had been carefully examined by Mi-. Webster, and had also been pub- 



