DESPATCHES, REPORTS, CORRESPONDENCE, ETC. 739 



It is no answer to this suggestion to say that an arrangement thus 

 concluded can not be valid or effectual without the advice and consent 

 of the Senate, for the rights and interests of the people of the United 

 States might be so neglected, misunderstood, abandoned, or sold by 

 President's " plenipotentiaries " as to greatly embarrass, if not defeat, 

 their ultimate re-assertion in better times and under better adminis- 

 trations, though it is hoped that such will not be the case in respect of 

 these negotiations. 



The document submitted to the Senate by the President as the out- 

 come of these negotiations may, it is thought, well illustrate the 

 dangers of such methods. 



But holding in reserve, for the time being, these grave questions 

 touching usurpations of unconstitutional powers, or the abuse of tnXJse 

 that may be thought to exist on the part of the executive, the com- 

 mittee thinks it sufficient for the present occasion to deal with the 

 document itself. 



The subject with which, according to the message of the President 

 transmitting it, this document professes to deal, is " the settlement of 

 the questions growing out of the rights claimed by American fisher- 

 men in British North American waters." And the document opens 

 with the statement that it has to deal with " differences * * * 

 concerning the interpretation of article I of the convention of October 

 20, 1818." The article referred to appears in an earlier part of this 

 report. 



The language of this article is, as has often been stated in long 

 discussions upon the subject, perfectly clear. And as it respects the 

 territorial limits wherein American fishermen should no longer haye 

 their ancient right of fishing, there has not been and can not be any 

 question capable of discussion, other than that which may arise from 

 the use of the words " bays," etc., of Her Majesty's dominions. 



The article itself, in clear and unmistakable language, recognised 

 and adopted 3 miles from the shore as the extreme limit of municipal 

 dominion and exclusion, but it also used the words " bays," etc. 

 British bays as included within the prohibited territory. 



For many years after the conclusion of this treaty of 1818 there 

 does not appear to have been any difficulty in respect of the exercise 

 of the rights of American fishermen in bays along the British North 

 American coast that were more than 6 miles wide at their entrance, 

 thus following the description embraced in the 3-mile designation of 

 municipal boundary. 



But when the Canadians found that they could not have 

 443 the same advantages enjoyed by American citizens, fishermen, 

 in introducing their fish and other products into the United 

 States on the same terms as our own citizens, a system of restrictive 

 claim was adopted, and the pretension was set up that any bay, no 

 matter how wide, indenting British North America, was a British 

 bay, and that the American fishermen were by the treaty of 1818 

 forbidden to fish therein, and in 1843 the first seizure under that 

 claim occurred. The American fishing vessel Washington was the 

 vessel. What was decided and settled in her case has already been 

 stated. 



From that day to this no instance has been brought to the atten- 

 tion of the committee (among all the various and very numerous 

 seizures of American fishing vessels by the British authorities under 



