488 APPENDIX TO BRITISH CASE. 



6th of January, 1878, was duly received in your despatch No. 81 of 

 October 28, 1880. 



As the separation of the questions raised by that occurrence and 

 the method of their solution were general suggestions on the part of 

 Her Britannic Majesty's Government, I had naturally supposed that 

 this despatch would have been followed by such definite propositions 

 as this Government could either accept or decline the more so as I 

 had (on June 12th, 1880), in reply to your telegraphic Report of a 

 conversation with Lord Granville, authorized you to say that "the 

 President will be quite ready to entertain any considerations which 

 may be presented to the Secretary of State to relieve the question of 

 the fisheries from its present difficulties." 



If however, as circumstances would seem to indicate, I am to con- 

 sider this communication as a preliminary inquiry from Lord Gran- 

 ville for the purpose of learning whether such suggestion would be 

 so favourably received by this Government as to justify the opening 

 of direct negotiations, it becomes my duty to put you in possession of 

 the impressions which this inquiry has made upon the Government of 

 the United States. 



As I understand the purport of Lord Granville's communication, 

 Her Britannic Majesty's Government desires to arrange the compen- 

 sation due the United States fishermen for the disturbances at For- 

 tune Bay, without the formal consideration or decision of any ques- 

 tions of Treaty construction which the facts of that disturbance might 

 seem to raise, resting the right of compensation solely upon the un- 

 lawful violence exercised by British subjects in Newfoundland. 

 291 The facts in this case are not complicated and the calcula- 



tions are simple. The United States Government does not see 

 in its present condition or character sufficient grounds to require any 

 very elaborate method of decision such as a Commission or the neces- 

 sity for any protracted inquiry. If Her Britannic Majesty's Gov- 

 ernment will propose the submission of the computation of damages 

 to the summary award of the Secretary of State of the United States 

 and Her Britannic Majesty's Representative at Washington (this 

 function to be exercised either directly or by such delegation as may 

 seem to them judicious), the Government of the United States will 

 accept the proposition and close this controversy on the basis of that 

 award. 



But in signifying to Her Britannic Majesty's Government the wil- 

 lingness of the United States to accede to such a proposition, you will 

 carefully guard against any admission of the correctness of those 

 views of our Treaty rights which are expressed either explicity or by 

 implication in Lord Granville's communication of October the 29th, 

 1880. 



The views of this Government upon the proper construction of the 

 rigjits of fishery guaranteed by the Treaty of Washington, have been 

 fully expressed in my former despatches, and no reasons have been 

 furnished to induce a change of opinion. The delay in the setttle- 

 ment of the Fortune Bay case has been already too long protracted. 

 It has provoked a not unnatural feeling of irritation among the fish- 

 ermen of the United States at what they conceive to be a persistent 

 denial of their Treaty rights, while it is to be feared that it has 

 encouraged among the provincial fishermen the idea that their forci- 



