190 CORRESPONDENCE, ETC., 



fishermen. The Canadian government had no reason to believe that 

 that force would be withdrawn, and therefore had no intention of 

 putting on an armed force of its own. It was the intention of gov- 

 ernment to have a certain number of police vessels there for the 

 enforcement of law in those waters. 



Debate 9th March, in Hoitse of Commons, Ottawa. 



Mr. Coffin moved an address for correspondence respecting depre- 

 dations committed by American fishermen in Canadian waters. He 

 said that it was necessary to know whether we were to have an effi- 

 cient protection from the British government in this matter. He 

 believed that that protection had for some time been a farce, and he 

 did not think due attention had been paid by the British government 

 to the protection of the seacoasts of the Dominion. It was also im- 

 portant that the American government should know what we are 

 about. He wanted to have justice done on both sides. From 1851 

 to 1854 the Nova Scotian government had protected its fishermen so 

 that American fishermen complained to their government, who sent 

 a force to protect American fishermen. The officers were honorable 

 men who afforded the people protection, and Nova Scotia fisher- 

 men were then more properly protected than now. He thought 

 some good result might follow a similar course now. 



Dr. Robitaille said that the answers given by government to some 

 question of his on the same subject were not satisfactory to him. 

 They had said they had no control over the vessels of the royal 

 navy; that was quite true; but last session they had promised that 

 an arrangement would be made for having two or three vessels of 

 the royal navy to protect our fisheries. Such vessels had not pro- 

 tected our fisheries at any rate, in the Bay Chaleurs, nor had the 

 schooner La Canadienne. This was not the fault, he was sure, of 

 the commander of that schooner, whom he knew to be a very efficient 

 officer, and if he had had instructions to go to the Bay of Chaleurs 

 he would have done so. With reference to another question, he 

 would repeat that depredations had been committed on pur shores 

 by American fishermen some of them within a few miles of his 

 own residence. They had stolen boats belonging to our fishermen, 

 and had in other ways acted in a barbarous manner. The answer 

 of the government was that the local authorities ought to have seen 

 that the law was respected. Why, in one harbor he had seen no less 

 than two hundred and thirty American schooners, manned by six- 

 teen or twenty men each, sometimes not less than twelve or fifteen 

 hundred of these men on shore at one time. How could the local 

 authorities, who had no police force at their command, see that the 

 law was respected? These American fishermen were supposed to 

 hold licenses, but it was a fact that not one-eighth of them had 

 licenses. There was no one to see that they had licenses, and they 

 all passed as holding licenses, and as therefore entitled to come on 

 shore. In view of these facts it was certainly not very satisfactory 

 to be told by government that the local authorities should protect 

 themselves. 



Sir J. A. Macdonald thought that if the honorable gentleman had 

 heard the answers of government in extenso, he would not have 

 spoken as he did. His answer was that the steamer of the royal navy 



