684 APPENDIX TO BRITISH CASE. 



the other which are open to foreign commerce. Our treaty of 1815 

 with Great Britain declares: 



There shall be between the territories of the United States of America and all 

 the territories of his Kritannic Majesty /// Knrope a reciprocal liberty of com- 

 merce. The inhabitants of the two countries, respectively, shall have liberty 

 freely and securely to come with their ships and cargoes to all such places, 

 ports, and rivers in the territories aforesaid to which other foreigners are per- 

 mitted to come, to enter into the same, and to remain and reside in any parts 

 of the said territories, respectively ; also to have and occupy houses and ware- 

 houses for the purposes of their commerce ; and, generally, the merchants and 

 traders of each nation, respectively, shall enjoy the most complete protection 

 and security for their commerce, but subject always to the laws and statutes of 

 the two countries respectively. 



Then, in the second section is this stipulation : 



The intercourse between the United States and his Britannic Majesty's 

 possessions in the West Indies, and on the continent of North America, shall 

 not be affected by any of the provisions of this article, but each party shall 

 remain in the complete possession of its rir/hts with respect to such an inter- 

 course. 



I am not aware of any treaty, excepting the fishing clauses of the 

 treaty of 1818, to which I have referred, and the treaty of 1871 (to 

 which I will refer hereafter), or of any rule of international law 

 binding on the United States, which now constrains Great Britain 

 to commercial intercourse with ourselves in her Canadian ports. 

 My previous training, and the line of my studies and occupations in 

 this Department, warn me to speak with caution, and subject to cor- 

 rection from my very able and better instructed colleague, Mr. Bay- 

 ard, on the subject to which your committee has invited my atten- 

 tion, and on which you have requested my opinon; but were the 

 situation reversed, and were England to demand, as a right, com- 

 mercial access to our ports for Canadian vessels which, for reasons 

 satisfactory to ourselves, we saw fit to exclude, or if Congress were, 

 by legislation conforming to the treaty of 1815, to even exclude 

 British vessels covered by that treaty, I think we should say, and be 

 entitled to say, that such commercial advantages in all our bays, 

 harbors, and ports, from Mount Desert to Cape Cod, and from Cape 

 Cod to Cape Hatteras, belong to us to interpret as strictly, and 

 either to hold exclusively for our own vessels, if we see fit so to do, 

 or to exchange them for equivalents. That question, touching 

 408 the commercial relation of all our vessels to open Canadian 

 ports. I deem quite apart from the relation of our fishing ves- 

 sels to taking, drying, or curving fish on Canadian coasts under the 

 treaties of 1783 and 1818, and the relation of those vessels to shelter, 

 repairs, wood and water, under the treaty of 1818 while on those 

 coasts. 



THE REAL ISSUE. 



This loiig introduction to clear away irrelevant matter, which the 

 necessity of rapid dictation suggested by your letter prevents me 

 from shortening as I could wish, brings me to say that, from the 

 point of view of this Department, Great Britain can, if she deems it 

 for her interest, or necessary for her safety, retreat from the under- 

 standings and agreements of 1830. AVhether such retreat therefrom 

 is to be deemed by us an unfriendly act, will depend on its motives 

 and environment. To be sure the arrangement of 1830 was not in 



