DESPATCHES, REPORTS, CORRESPONDENCE, ETC. 603 



which have been addressed to you in relation to it, both by my pred- 

 ecessor and by myself, have amply evinced the earnest desire of Her 

 Majesty's Government to arrive at some equitable settlement of the 

 controversy. It is, therefore, with feelings of disappointment that 

 they do not find in your note under reply any indication of a wish 

 on the part of your Government to enter upon negotiations based 

 on the principle of mutual concessions, but rather a suggestion that 

 some ad interim construction of the terms of the existing Treaty 

 should, if possible, be reached, which might for the present remove 

 the chance of disputes; in fact, that Her Majesty's Government, in 

 order to allay the differences which have arisen, should temporarily 

 abandon the exercise of the Treaty rights which they claim and 

 which they conceive to be indisputable. For Her Majesty's Govern- 

 ment are unable to perceive any ambiguity in the terms of Article I 

 of the Convention of 1818; nor have they as yet been informed in 

 what respects the construction placed upon that instrument by the 

 Government of the United States differs from their own. 



They would, therefore, be glad to learn in the first place whether 

 the Government of the United States contest that by Article I of the 

 Convention United States fishermen are prohibited from entering 

 British North American bays or harbours on those parts of the coast 

 referred to in the second part of the Article in question for any 

 purposes save those of shelter, repairing damages, purchasing wood 



and obtaining water. 



360 Before proceeding to make some observations upon the other 



points dealt with in your note, I have the honour to state that 



I do not propose in the present communication to refer to the cases 



of the schooners Thomas F. Bayard and Mascot, to which you allude. 



The privileges manifestly secured to United States fishermen by the 

 Convention of 1818 in Newfoundland, Labrador, and the Magdalen 

 Islands are not contested by Her Majesty's Government, who, whilst 

 determined to uphold the rights of Her Majesty's North American 

 subjects, as defined in the Convention, are no less anxious and re- 

 solved to maintain in their full integrity the facilities for prosecuting 

 the fishing industry on certain limited portions of the coast which 

 are expressly granted to citizens of the United States. The com- 

 munications on the subject of these two schooners, which I have re- 

 quested Her Majesty's Minister at Washington to address to Mr. 

 Bayard, cannot, I think, have failed to afford to your Government 

 satisfactory assurances in this respect. 



Reverting now to your note under reply, I beg to offer the following 

 observations on its contents : 



In the first place, you take exception to my predecessor having de- 

 clined to discuss the case of the David J. Adams on the ground that 

 it was still sub judice, and you state that your Government are unable 

 to accede to the proposition contained in my note of the 1st Septem- 

 ber last, to the effect that " it is clearly right, according to practice 

 and precedent, that such diplomatic action should be suspended pend- 

 ing the completion of the judicial inquiry." 



In regard to this point, it is to be remembered that there are three 

 questions calling for investigation in the case of the David J. Adams: 



(1) What were the acts committed which led to the seizure of the 

 vessel ? 



