QUESTION ONE. 25 



to depend solely on the good feeling or good sense of the individuals 

 who may at any time happen to be engaged in those fisheries. 



In reply the Earl of Clarendon said (llth October, 1855) (App.. 

 p. 208) : 



28 By the Reciprocity Treaty between this country and the 

 United States. American citizens are admitted to the benefit 



of certain fisheries carried on in British waters in common with Her 

 Majesty's subjects. It follows as a necessary consequence that such 

 American citizens are bound to observe the existing laws and regula- 

 tions established for the conduct of such fisheries by which British 

 subjects are bound. This is necessarily implied in the very words 

 of the article of the treaty, but independently of all agreement, it 

 would follow, on general principles, that American fishermen pur- 

 suing their occupation within British territory would be bound to 

 observe the local laws and regulations in like manner as all foreign- 

 ers are bound to observe the municipal laws of the country in which 

 they are resident. 



It is indeed literally true, as Mr. Marcy states, that there is no 

 express stipulation in the Reciprocity Treaty which bids American 

 citizens to observe the British colonial regulations, but the obligation 

 to do so did not require a stipulation; it attaches upon American citi- 

 zens as soon as they claim the benefit of the Treaty. 



Upon those instructions Mr. Crampton had a conversation with 

 Mr. Marcy. He pointed out the objections to the language of the 

 circular, and proceeded as follows (App., p. 210.) : 



I admitted. I said, that if any of those laws were framed or exe- 

 cuted so as to make an unfair discrimination in favour of British 

 fishermen, or directly or indirectly to deprive American fishermen 

 of the privileges secured to them by the Reciprocity Treaty, this 

 would afford just ground for representation to Her Majesty's Gov- 

 ernment by the Government of the United States. But I called Mr. 

 Marcy 's attention to the danger of allowing to each individual the 

 right to judge for himself whether a regulation was in conformity 

 with the provisions of the Treaty or not, and at once to object to 

 observe it. 



Mr. Marcy appeared entirely to concur in this view of the matter, 

 and said that he would cause such an alteration to be made in the 

 wording of the circular instruction to be issued for the approaching 

 fishing season as would obviate the objection which I had put 

 forward. 



MR. MARCY'S NEW CIRCULAR, 1856. 



Mr. Marcy shortly afterwards sent to Mr. Crampton the draft of 

 a new circular in which Mr. Crampton made certain amendments, 

 and Mr. Marcy issued (28th March, 1856) another circular, in which 

 he said (App., pp. 209, 211.) : 



It is deemed reasonable and desirable that both United States and 

 British fishermen should pay a like respect to such laws and regula- 

 tions, which are designed to preserve and increase the productive- 

 ness of the fisheries on those coasts. Such being the object of 



29 these laws and regulations, the observance of them is enjoined 



