724 APPENDIX TO BRITISH CASE. 



freely states what she is willing to acept. and if the convention is 

 ratified, Congress may freely adopt its terms if it deems it for the 

 interest of the country so to do. 



The objections that the treaty does not secure privileges for bait, 

 shipping men and transshipping fish are not considered here, as they 

 have been fully discussed elsewhere. Also discussion of the other 

 ill-founded objection that the treaty gives us nothing worth purchas- 

 ing is omitted, because it makes no attempt to purchase anything. It 

 gives no consideration whatever for the benefits which we receive 

 under it. 



Much has been said by the opponents of the treaty concerning the 

 reciprocal arrangement of A. D. 1830; and indeed some of them appar- 

 ently suppose a treaty with Great Britain was then made. The most 

 convenient way of understanding that arrangement is to turn to 

 Jackson's proclamation of May 29, A. D. 1830, by which it was 

 brought to its completion ; and its entire practical effect is made clear 

 from the circular of the Secretary of the Treasury to the collectors of 

 customs of October 6, A. D. 1830. and by the order in council of 

 November 5 of the same year. 



While this marked a long step forward in reciprocal arrangements 

 with the neighboring provinces, so that it afforded the Secretary of 

 State, Mr. Bayard, very just and persuasive arguments in favor of 

 the most liberal treatment by Canada of our fishing vessels, yet its 

 very letter, as well as its spirit, related exclusively to vessels engaged 

 in commerce and to merchandise carried from the ports of one country 

 to the ports of another. Not only did it not contemplate the pur- 

 chase of fishing supplies to be used on the ocean and other facilities 

 for fishing vessels, but its phraseology clearly excluded any such 

 purpose. Are we any more entitled to demand under it as a right 

 reciprocity in matters of this sort than Great Britain or Canada 

 can demand under it reciprocity in the coasting trade or in the 

 registering of vessels? And is there anything either in this recip- 

 rocal arrangement or in any other between the United States and 

 Great Britain or Canada which renders the refusal to our fishermen 

 of the special benefits of the near locality of Nova Scotia to the 

 fishing grounds more unfriendly, in that sense which justifies retalia- 

 tion, than our refusal to permit British, including Canadian, vessels 

 to enter our coasting trade, while ours freely engaged in the larger 

 coasting trade of the British Empire; or than the refusal to permit 

 the sale by the British, including the Canadians, of their vessels 

 to pur citizens with registration, while we may freely sell and register 

 our vessels in any part of the British possessions? There is a wide 

 gulf between this class of privileges which nations grant or refuse 

 in accordance with their - own broad or narrow views of their own 

 interests and that class which affects the comfort of strangers and 

 their property in foreign ports. All the latter the treaty just nego- 

 tiated secures and perpetuates. 



In the official pamphlet of the National Fishery Association of 

 March 1, 1888, there is given on the twelfth page the following 

 alternative for this treaty : 



It may be asked how shall we deal with this matter? What can be done to 

 settle the fishery question between the British North American provinces and 

 the United States? This can be done, and it has the sanction of the Forty- 

 -ninth Congress. Wipe out all legislative commercial arrangements and let us 



