504 APPENDIX TO BRITISH CASE. 



from exercising freely the same customary and reasonable rights and 

 privileges of trade in the ports of the British Colonies as are freely 

 allowed to British vessels in all the ports of the United States under 

 the laws and regulations to which I have adverted. 



Among these customary rights and privileges may be enumerated 

 the purchase of ship supplies of every nature, making repairs, the 

 shipment of crews in whole or part, and the purchase of ice and 

 bait for use in deep-sea fishing. 



Concurrently, these usual rational and convenient privileges are 

 freely extended to and are fully enjoyed by the Canadian merchant 

 marine of all occupations, including fishermen, in the ports of the 

 United States. 



The question therefore arises whether such a construction is ad- 

 missible as would convert the Treaty of 1818, from being an instru- 

 mentality for the protection of the inshore fisheries along the de- 

 scribed parts of the British American coast, into a pretext or means 

 of obstructing the business of deep-sea fishing by citizens of the 

 United States, and of interrupting and destroying the commercial 

 intercourse that, since the Treaty of 1818 and independent of any 

 treaty whatever, has grown up and now exists under the concur- 

 rent and friendly laws and mercantile regulations of the respective 

 countries ? 



I may recall to your attention the fact that a proposition to ex- 

 clude the vessels of the United States engaged in fishing from carry- 

 ing also merchandise was made by the British negotiators of the 

 Treaty of 1818, but being resisted by the American negotiators, was 

 abandoned. This fact would seem clearly to indicate that the busi- 

 ness of fishing did not then and does not now disqualify a vessel from 

 also trading in the regular ports of entry. 



I have been led to offer these considerations by the recent seizures 

 of American vessels to which I have adverted and by indications of 

 a local spirit of interpretation in the provinces affecting friendly in- 

 tercourse, which is, I firmly believe, not warranted by the terms of 

 the stipulations on which it professes to rest. It is not my purpose 

 to prejudge the facts of the cases. nor have I any desire to shield any 

 American vessel from the consequences of violation of international 

 obligation. The views I have advanced may prove not to be appli- 

 cable in every feature to those particular cases, and I should be glad 

 if no case whatever were to arise calling in question the good under- 

 standing of the two countries in this regard in order to be free from 

 the grave apprehensions which, otherwise, I am unable to dismiss. 



It would be most unfortunate and, I cannot refrain from saying, 

 most unworthy if the two nations who contracted the Treaty of 

 1818 should permit any questions of mutual right and duty under 

 that Convention to become obscured by partizan advocacy or dis- 

 torted by the heat of local interests. It cannot but be the common 

 aim to conduct all discussion in this regard with dignity and in a 

 self-respecting spirit, that will show itself intent upon securing equal 

 justice rather than unequal advantage. Comity, courtesy, and justice 

 cannot, I am sure, fail to be the ruling motives and objects of dis- 

 cussion. 



I shall be most happy to come to a distinct and friendly under- 

 standing with you, as the representative of Her Britannic Majesty's 

 Government, which will result in such a definition of the rights of 



