486 APPENDIX TO BRITISH CASE. 



sions of the Treaties which regulate the rights of United States' fish- 

 ermen on the coast of Newfoundland. 



In the first place, I desire that there should be no possibility of 

 misconception as to the views entertained by Her Majesty's Govern- 

 ment respecting the conduct of the Newfoundland fishermen in vio- 

 lently interfering with the United States' fishermen, and destroying 

 or damaging some of their nets. Her Majesty's Government have no 

 hesitation in admitting that this proceeding was quite indefensible, 

 and is much to be regretted. No sense of injury to their rights, how- 

 ever well founded, could, under the circumstances, justify the British 

 fishermen in taking the law into their own hands, and committing acts 

 of violence; but I will revert by and by to this feature in the case, and 

 will now proceed to the important question raised in this controversy, 

 whether, under the Treaty of Washington, the United States' fisher- 

 men are bound to observe the fishery regulations of Newfoundland 

 in common with British subjects. 



Without entering into any lengthy discussion on this point, I feel 

 bound to state that, in the opinion of Her Majesty's Government, the 

 clause in the Treaty of Washington which provides that the citizens 

 of the United States shall be entitled, " in common with British sub- 

 jects," to fish in Newfoundland waters within the limits of British 

 sovereignty, means that the American and the British fishermen shall 

 fish in these waters upon terms of equality ; and not that there shall 

 be an exemption of American fishermen from any reasonable regula- 

 tions to which British fishermen are subject. 



Her Majesty's Government entirely concur in Mr. Marcy's Circular 

 of the 28th March, 1856. The principle therein laid down appears to 

 them perfectly sound, and as applicable to the fishery provisions of 

 the Treaty of Washington as to those of the Treaty which Mr. Marcy 

 had in view. They cannot, therefore, admit the accuracy of the 

 opinion expressed in Mr. Evarts' letter to Mr. Welsh of the 28th 

 September, 1878, "that the fishery rights of the United States con- 

 ceded by the Treaty of Washington are to be exercised wholly free 

 from the restraints and regulations of the Statutes of Newfound- 

 land," if by that opinion anything inconsistent with Mr. Marcy's 

 principle is really intended. Her Majesty's Government, however, 

 fully admit that, if any such local Statutes could be shown to be 

 inconsistent with the express stipulations, or even with the spirit of 

 the Treaty, they would not be within the category of those reasonable 

 regulations by which American (in common with British) fishermen 

 ought to be bound; and they observe, on the other hand, with much 

 satisfaction, that Mr. Evarts, at the close of his letter to Mr. Welsh 

 of the 1st August, 1879, after expressing regret at "the conflict of 

 interests which the exercise of the Treaty privileges enjoyed by the 

 United States appears to have developed," expressed himself as 

 follows : 



There is no intention on the part of this [the United States'] Govern- 

 290 ment that these privileges should be abused, and no desire that their 



full and free enjoyment should harm the colonial fishermen. 

 While the differing interests and methods of the shore fishery and the vessel 

 fishery make it impossible that the regulation of the one should be entirely 

 given to the other, yet if the mutual obligations of the Treaty of 1871 aiv to be 

 maintained, the United States Government would gladly cooperate with the 

 Government of Her Britannic Majesty in any effort to make those regulations 



