30 COUNTER CASE OF THE UNITED STATES. 



conformity with the provisions of the treaty or not. and at once to 

 object to observe it." 



On Mr. Crampton's own statement of the case, therefore, it is evi- 

 dent that the objection to the statement in Mr. Marcy's circular that 

 " there is nothing in the Reciprocity Treaty between the United States 

 and Great Britain which stipulates for the observance of these regu- 

 lations " was not that this statement was not true, but that it allowed 

 each individual the right to judge for himself whether existing laws 

 were in conformity with the provisions of the treaty or not, which 

 was a question to be determined by the two Governments and not by 

 the fishermen. 



Mr. Marcy's view of the situation is disclosed by an examina- 

 tion of the revised circular prepared by him in the following year. 

 A draft of this circular was sent by Mr. Marcy to Mr. Crampton on 

 March 28, 1856, with the request "to return it with such remarks 

 thereon as you may see fit to make." 6 Mr. Crampton seems to have 

 suggested no changes in this circular except the insertion of a new 

 passage; and although Mr. Marcy substituted a somewhat different 

 passage, which was not entirely satisfactory to Mr. Crampton, the 

 latter apparently raised no further objection to the circular. The 

 revised circular in its final form was as follows : 



DEPARTMENT OF STATE, 



Washington, March #<?, 1856. 

 To CHARLES H. PEASLEE, Esq., 



Collector of the Customs, Boston. 



SIR: It is understood that there are certain Acts of the British 

 North American Colonial legislatures, and also, perhaps, Executive 

 Regulations, intended to prevent the wanton destruction of the fish 

 which frequent the coasts of the Colonies, and injuries to the fishing 

 thereon. It is deemed reasonable and desirable that both United 

 States and British fishermen should pay a like respect to such laws 

 and regulations, which are designed to preserve and increase the 

 productiveness of the fisheries on those coasts. Such being the object 

 of these laws and regulations, the observance of them is enforced (?) 

 upon the citizens of the United States in like manner as they are 

 observed by British subjects. By granting the mutual use of the 

 inshore fisheries neither party has yielded its right to civic (?) juris- 

 diction over a marine league along its coast. Its laws are as obligatory 

 upon the citizens or subjects of the other as upon its own. The laws 

 of the British Provinces not in conflict with the provisions of the 

 Reciprocity Treaty would be as binding upon citizens of the United 



British Case Appendix, p. 210. c British Case Appendix, p. 211. 

 * British Case Appendix, p. 209. 



