262 APPENDIX TO BRITISH CASE. 



to him singular that they adverted to expressions as being used in 

 the Treaty which were nowhere to be found in it : he alluded to that 

 part of the opinion where it is said, " as we are of opinion that the 

 " term headland is used in the Treaty to express the part of the land 

 "we have before mentioned including the interior of the bays and 

 " indents of the coast." Now, said Mr. Fillmore, there is no such term 

 as headland in the Treaty at all, which would look as \i the opinion 

 had been drawn up without reference being made to the text of the 

 Convention of 1818. He also remarked that as well as he had been 

 able to ascertain the fact, the Government of the United States had, 

 on various previous occasions, contested the construction maintained 

 by the opinion in question. 



Mr. Fillmore concluded by saying that he had been strongly urged to 

 send some vessels of war to the fishing grounds in question for the pur- 

 pose of protecting American interests there, but that he had hitherto 

 declined doing so from his apprehension of the consequences of such 

 a measure so long as the two Governments wene not agreed as to 

 the rights which each sought to define and to assert. What he would 

 propose was that Mr. Webster and myself should make some tem- 

 porary arrangement of the matter until the true sense of the Treaty 

 should be determined by the two Governments between themselves, or, 

 if necessary, be referred to the decision of some friendly Power, and 

 he suggested that such an arrangement might be effected by each 

 party^ abstaining for the present to ta'ke any measures /ft assertion 

 of their supposed right, that is to say, that the British authorities 

 on the sea board should refrain from molesting any American fishing 

 vessel which might be found to be carrying on its operations within 

 the prescribed distance of three miles, as this is understood by the 

 British construction of the Treaty, but al the same time without the 

 prescribed distance, as understood by the American construction: 

 \vhile the United States Government, on the other hand, should take 

 every means in their power to prevent their own citizens from fishing 

 within the prescribed distance as understood by the British con- 

 struction, until such time as the question as to which construction 

 ought to prevail, should be determined on, or until the question 

 should be otherwise disposed of by treaty or mutual legislation. 



I have the honour to be, with the greatest respect, my Lord, 

 Your Lordship's most obedient humble servant, 



JOHN. F. CRAMPTON. 



The Right Honorable, Earl of Malmesbury. 



&c. &c. &c. 



' P.S. New York. 22nd July, 1852. I open this despatch to inclose 

 the copy of a publication which has been made by Mr. Webster of a 

 despatch from Mr. Everett to Mr. Buchanan dated London, 2Gth 

 April 1845, which bears upon the point in question in regard to the 

 fisheries. It would appear from this that the United States Govern- 

 ment did not, at the time that despatch was written, demand as a 

 right the privileges they now contend for, and that consequently they 

 dia not contest the construction of the Treaty then and now held by 

 Her Majesty's Government. 



J F C 



