DESPATCHES, REPORTS, CORRESPONDENCE, ETC. 637 



them." The " restrictions to be imposed upon the American fisher- 

 men, while in portion B, are expressly limited, not to such as con- 

 cern navigation or revenue, but to such as were specifically renounced, 

 namely, to such as " may be necessary to prevent their taking, drying, 

 or curing fish therein, or in any other manner whatever abusing the 

 privileges hereby reserved to them " in order to take, dry, or cure fish 

 therein. 



Was it not clearly the intention of the negotiators of this treaty 

 that the character of these restrictions should be agreed upon by the 

 parties to the treaty? Is it reasonable to assume that the American 

 negotiators intended that the Canadian provinces, or even the British 

 Government, should have the exclusive power to prescribe " restric- 

 tions " which might entirely destroy the value of any unrenounced 

 right and liberty theretofore claimed and enjoyed, or of any con- 

 ceded " privileges " thereby reserved to American fishermen in por- 

 tion B ? 



These preliminary explanations will assist to measure the force 

 and bearing upon American deep-sea fishermen of the interpreta- 

 tion put upon the treaty by the Canadian Dominion during the last 

 summer. 



The following extracts are taken from the message of the President 

 to Congress of the 8th ultimo. 



WHAT CANADA HAS SAID. 



On 5th June, 1886, the Canadian Minister of Marine and Fisheries 

 declared : 



It appears the "Jennie and Julia " is n vessel of about 14 tons register, that 



she was to all intents and purposes a fishing vessel, and, at the time of her 



entry into the Port of Digby had fishing gear and apparatus on board, 



380 and that the collector fully satisfied himself of these facts. According to 



the master's declaration, she was there to purchase fresh herring only. 



and wished to get them direct from the weir fishermen. The collector, upon 



his conviction that she was a fishing vessel, and. as such, debarred ft.?/ the treaty 



of 1818 from entering Canadian ports fur the purposes of trade, therefore, in 



the exercise of his plain duty, warned her off. 



The treaty of ISIS is explicit in its terms, and by it United States' fishing 

 vessels are allowed to enter Canadian ports for shelter, repairs, wood, and 

 water, and " for no other purpose whatever." 



The undersigned is of the opinion that it cannot be successfully contended 

 that a bona-flfle fishing vessel can, by simply declaring her intention of purchas- 

 ing fresh fish for other than baiting purposes, evade the provisions of the 

 treaty of ISIS, and obtain privileges not contemplated thereby. If that were 

 admitted, the provision of the treaty which excludes United States' fishing 

 vessels for all purposes but the four above-mentioned would be rendered null 

 and void, and the whole United States' fishing fleet be at once lifted out of 

 the category of fishing vessels and allowed the free use of Canadian ports for 

 baiting, obtaining supplies, and transhipping cargoes. 



It appears to the undersigned that the question as to whether a vessel is a 

 fishing vessel or a legitimate trader or merchant vessel is one of fact, and to 

 be decided by the character of the vessel and the nature of her outfit, and that 

 the class to which she belongs is not to be determined by the simple declara- 

 tion of her master that he is not at any given time acting in the character of 

 a fisherman. 



At the same time the undersigned hogs again to observe that Canada has 

 no desire to interrupt the long established and legitimate commercial inter- 

 course with the United States, but rather to encourage and maintain it. and 

 that Canadian ports are at present open to the whole merchant navy of the 

 United States on the same liberal conditions as heretofore accorded. 



