DESPATCHES, KEPOETS, CORRESPONDENCE, ETC. 227 



a reference to the correspondence between Mr. Stevenson and Vis- 

 count Palmerston on the subject of former complaints of the Ameri- 

 can Government, of the manner in which the fishing vessels of the 

 United States had in several ways been interfered with by the pro- 

 vincial authorities, in contravention as is believed, of the treaty of 

 October, 1818, between the two countries. Lord Aberdeen's atten- 

 tion was particularly invited to the fact that no answer as yet had 

 been returned to Mr. Stevenson's note to Lord Palmerston, of 27th 

 March, 1841, the receipt of which and its reference to the Colonial 

 department were announced by a note of Lord Palmerston of the 2d 

 April. The undersigned further observed that on the 28th of the 

 same month Lord Palmerston acquainted Mr. Stevenson that his 

 lordship had been advised from the Colonial office, that " copies of 

 the papers received from Mr. Stevenson would be furnished to Lord 

 Falkland, with instructions to inquire into the allegations contained 

 therein, and to furnish a detailed report on the subject"; but that 

 there was not found on the files of this legation any further com- 

 munication from Lord Palmerston on the subject. 



The note of Lord Aberdeen, of the 15th of April last, is confined 

 exclusively to the case of the Washington ; and it accordingly becomes 

 the duty of the undersigned again to invite his lordship s attention 

 to the correspondence above referred to between Mr. Stevenson and 

 Lord Palmerston, and to request that inquiry may be made, with- 

 out unnecessary delay, into all the causes of complaint which have 

 been made by the American Government against the improper inter- 

 ference of the British colonial authorities with the fishing vessels of 

 the United States. 



In reference to the case of the Washington, Lord Aberdeen, in 

 his note of the 15th of April, justifies her seizure by an armed pro- 

 vincial vessel, on the assumed fact that, as she was found fishing in 

 the Bay of Fundy, she was within the limits from which the fishing 

 vessels of the United States are excluded by the provisions of the 

 convention between the two countries of October 1818. 



The undersigned had remarked in his note of the 10th of August 

 last, on the impropriety of the conduct of the colonial authorities in 

 proceeding in reference to a question of construction of a treaty 

 pending between the two countries, to decide the question in their 

 own favor, and in virtue of that decision to order the capture of the 

 vessels of a friendly State. A summary exercise of power of this 

 kind, the undersigned is sure would never be resorted to by her 

 134 Majesty's government, except in an extreme case, while a 

 negotiation was in train on the point at issue. Such a pro- 

 cedure on the part of a local colonial authority, is of course highly 

 objectionable, and the undersigned cannot but again invite the atten- 

 tion of Lord Aberdeen to this view of the subject. 



With respect to the main question of the right of American vessels 

 to fish within the acknowledged limits of the Bay of Fundy, it is 

 necessary, for a clear understanding of the case, to go back to the 

 treaty of 1783. 



By this treaty it was provided that the citizens of the United 

 States should be allowed to take fish of every kind on such part 

 of the coast of Newfoundland as British fishermen shall use, (but 

 not to dry or cure the same on that island) and also on the coasts, 

 bays and creeks of all other of his Britannic Majesty's dominions 



