DESPATCHES, REPORTS, CORRESPONDENCE, ETC. 201 



stipulations which bear upon the subject, (the seizure of American 

 fishing vessels on the coast of Nova Scotia;) the conflicting questions 

 of right, if any, which have arisen under them ; and the nature and 

 circumstances of the cases which have been presented to this Gov- 

 ernment by our citizens, as infractions of right on the part of the 

 British authorities," the acting Secretary of State has the honor to 

 state : 



That the only existing treaty stipulations bearing upon the subject 

 are to be found in the first article of the convention between the 

 United States and Great Britain, signed at London on the 20th day 

 of October, 1818, which is in the words following: 



******* 



Under this article 



1. American vessels are allowed, forever, to take, dry, and cure 

 fish on and along the coasts of Newfoundland and Labrador, within 

 certain limits therein defined. 



2. The United States renounce, forever, any liberty before enjoyed 

 by their citizens to take fish within three marine miles of any coasts, 

 bays, creeks or harbors of the British dominions in America, not 

 included within the above limits, i. e. Newfoundland and Labrador. 



3. American vessels retain the privilege (under necessary restric- 

 tions to prevent their taking fish) of entering the bays, creeks, and 

 harbors of said possessions, for the purposes of shelter, repairing 

 damages, purchasing wood and obtaining water, and for no other 

 purpose whatever. 



It does not appear that the stipulations in the article above quoted 

 have, since the date of the convention, been the subject of conflicting 

 questions of right between the two Governments. The rights of 

 the respective parties are so clearly defined by the letter of the 

 treaty, as scarcely to leave room for such questions of an abstract or 

 general character. In their actual operation, however, inasmuch as 

 their application on the part of Great Britain was to be subjected 

 to local legislation, and committed to the hands of subordinate Brit- 

 ish agents, the provisions of the treaty might naturally be expected 

 to give rise to difficulties growing out of individual acts on either 

 side. The recent seizures appear to have had their origin in such 

 causes, like other causes of anterior date, to which a brief allusion 

 may here be useful. 



In June, 1823, the Secretary of State addressed a note to the Brit- 

 ish Minister at Washington, complaining of the seizure of the schoon- 

 er Charles, and demanding reparation for the indignity offered to the 

 American flag. The answer of the British Government was, that 

 the vessel had been found at anchor in a British harbor, which she 

 had entered on a false pretence of avoiding a storm; and had been 

 legally condemned by the vice admiralty court of New Brunswick, 

 for a breach of the convention of 1818, and of the Act of Parliament 

 to carry the same into effect. The vessel was subsequently restored. 



In September, 1824, a complaint was made to the British charge 

 d'affaires that several citizens of the State of Maine had been inter- 



a For Article I see p. 30 of this Appendix. 



