184 APPENDIX TO BRITISH _CASE. 



108 the pretension can not be supported. But you will see that 

 Mr. de Chateaubriand, in his letter of the 5th of April last, 

 while evading or abandoning the attempt of reply to Mr. Gallatin, 

 with regard to the claim of exclusive fishery, says that he had some 

 time since instructed the charge d'affaires of France at this place 

 to enter upon explanations with the Government of the United States 

 concerning this object, and that he was then writing to him again 

 about it. With regard to the exercise of force within the British 

 jurisdiction the Viscount has given Mr. Gallatin no answer whatever; 

 but Mr. Gallatin, in his letter to this department of 17th April, states 

 that in a conversation with the Minister of Marine, to whom he 

 knew the subject had been referred, that Minister "gave it as his 

 opinion, in explicit terms, that France, being in possession of the 

 exclusive right of fishing on the coast in question, inasmuch as she 

 had not before the last occurrence been disturbed in it by the fisher- 

 men either of England or America, she had the right to retain such 

 possession, and ought to continue to exercise that right by expelling 

 any vessels that should attempt to participate in the fisheries." Mr. 

 Gallatin had not ascertained whether the Viscount de Chateaubriand 

 and the other Minister concurred in this opinion of the Minister of 

 Marine, the candour and explicitness of which must be acknowledged, 

 but the charge d'affaires of France here declares that he has received 

 no instructions from his Government to give the explanations prom- 

 ised by the letter of Mr. Chateaubriand to Mr. Gallatin, and we 

 should no longer be excusable for refraining from a representation 

 of the whole case to the Government of Great Britain. The question 

 concerning the jurisdiction belongs peculiarly to her. The docu- 

 ments cited by you, in your correspondence with Mr. Gallatin, show 

 that the premises of the French Marine Minister, upon which he 

 relies for the basis of his opinion, are as incorrect in point of fact 

 as his conclusion is extraordinary in point of principle. The delib- 

 erate pretension to exercise force within purely British waters was 

 unexpected on the part of France. We shall not, for the present, 

 employ force to meet force, although that result was properly pre- 

 sented by Mr. Gallatin to the French Government as a consequence 

 to be anticipated from the perse verence of their armed vessels in 

 disturbing our fishermen. We respect the territorial jurisdiction of 

 Great Britain in resorting to her for the effectual exercise of it to 

 carry into execution her engagements with us. 



The President desires that, in your conferences with the British 

 Secretary of State, you will give him information of the present 

 state of this concern between us and France. You will be careful 

 to present it in the aspect the most favourable and friendly towards 

 France that can be compatible with the effective maintenance of our 

 own rights. It is probable that there may be no such interruption 

 to our fishermen during the present season ; and the occasion appear? 

 to be highly favourable for an adjustment of it to our satisfaction. 

 Perhaps a mutual explanation and understanding between the British 

 and French Governments concerning it, at this time, may render any 

 resort to other measures unnecessary. But if, on discussion of the sub- 

 ject between them, France should not explicitly desist from both the 

 pretensions to the exclusive fishery and to the exercise of force within 

 British waters to secure it, you will claim that which the British 

 Government cannot fail to perceive is due, the unmolested execution 



