116 CORRESPONDENCE, ETC., 



consulted, and I believe that more accurate information will change 

 your opinion on this point. 



You no longer regard the treaties concluded between France and 

 the United States in 1778 and 1800 as binding acts, and the stipula- 

 tions therein contained with regard to fishing rights therefore appear 

 to you to be no longer in force at present. Please observe, Sir, that 

 I did not question your general observation regarding the temporary 

 duration of both treaties. I confined myself to remarking that the 

 stipulations of the treaty of 1778, which related to the right of fishing 

 that belonged to France, were by no means a concession made to 

 France by the United States, but merely a declaration and recog- 

 nition by the latter country of a previous right, and that this 

 right, which was necessarily independent of the treaties in which it 

 was recalled, could by no means fall into desuetude with them. I 

 was constrained to infer from your said observation that this right 

 still continued after the treaties ceased to exist, and I added that the 

 United States Government, which had recognized it in two successive 

 treaties, had had no reason for questioning it since that time. I 

 asked you, finally, to observe that, until this order of things was 

 modified by an arrangement between the two Powers, it should be 

 considered as still continuing, and that it was to be desired that the 

 Federal Government might take measures to prevent any conflict of 

 jurisdiction over the exercise of this right. 



The reply which you have done me the honor to send to me does not 

 seem to me to destroy he observations which I made to you on Janu- 

 ary 22. Some time ago I directed the French Charge d'Affaires at 

 Washington to make explanations on this subject to the Federal Gov- 

 ernment. I am writing him again on the matter, and I feel con- 

 vinced, Sir, that the steps which he is instructed to take will succeed 

 in removing the misunderstandings and inconveniences which you 

 appear to fear in the letters which you have done me the honor to 

 address to me. The French Government desires itself that these mis- 

 understandings and inconveniences may be avoided, and to this end 

 it will be glad to seek every means of conciliation which may be con- 

 sistent with the exercise of its rights. 



Accept, Sir, the assurances, etc. CHATEAUBRIAND. 



Mr. Gallatin to Viscount de Chateaubriand. 



PARIS 16th April 1823. 



SIR: I had the honor to receive Your Excellency's letter of the 

 5th instant on the subject of the Newfoundland fisheries. 



The observation in my letter of the 14th of March last, that the 

 obligation contracted by the United States, by the treaty of 1778. 

 did not apply to the western coast of Newfoundland, was expressed 

 in too general terms, and applies only to that part of the coast which 

 extends from Cape Ray to Point Riche. However uncertain the 

 position of this point, which I have not been able to find in any of 

 the maps published before the treaty of Utrecht, it appears to have 

 been understood by both parties to be somewhere on the western 

 coast, and the right to fish between it and the Quirpon islands was 

 therefore secured to France by that treaty. This does not however 

 affect the main arguments used in my letter, as I reasoned on the 



