252 MISCELLANEOUS 



Mr. Ldboucherc to Governor Darling. 



No. 4.] DOWNING STREET, 16th January, 1857. 



Governor DARLING. 



SIR: With reference to former correspondence on the questions 

 so long pending between the British and French Governments re- 

 specting the Fisheries of Newfoundland, I have now to transmit to 

 you the copy of a Convention[] signed on the 14th of this month, and 

 the ratifications of which have been this day exchanged. I could 

 have wished that Her Majesty's Government had had the assistance, 

 as was at one time expected, of one of your principal advisers in 

 conducting this negotiation, but I believe that the views of the 

 Government and people of Newfoundland have been so fully placed 

 before this department by the Despatches and accompanying Docu- 

 ments of yourself and your predecessors, that nothing was wanting 

 to complete the necessary information on this head ; and the presence 

 of a gentleman specially entrusted by the French Government with 

 the conduct of the business, rendered it desirable to arrive, if pos- 

 sible, at an understanding without further delay. 



You are, as well as your advisers, so thoroughly versed in the 

 history of this long agitated subject, that the several provisions 

 of the Convention will be readily understood by you, without any 

 minute explanation on my part. The detail into which I propose 

 to enter is therefore rather with a view to point out the leading 

 principles which have governed Her Majesty's Government in this 

 transaction, than merely to remind you of well known facts. The 

 French rights on the coast of Newfoundland, under the former 

 Treaties, were the following: 



The exercise, during the summer season, of a right of fishery 

 from Cape Ray on the Southwest, round the Northern point of 

 the Island, to Cape St. John, on the North-east, comprising there- 

 fore, about half the coast of the Island. 



And the Crown was bound to take the most positive measures for 

 preventing its subjects from interrupting in any manner by their 

 competition (concurrence) the fishery of the French during such 

 temporary exercise. For this purpose the Crown was bound to 

 remove all fixed settlements from the shore. 



I will not now recapitulate the discussions which have taken place 

 at various times, as to whether this grant of fishery rights was "' ex- 

 clusive " as contended by France, or " concurrent " only as con- 

 tended by ourselves. Suffice it for the present to say, that the con- 

 clusion drawn by yourself in the " Remarks " appended to your 

 Despatch of the 23rd July last, is substantially that at which* im- 

 partial investigation could scarcely fail to arrive. Whether the 

 terms conveying the French right were logically equivalent or not 

 to the term " exclusive " they were at all events practically so ; since 

 English fishermen could not interrupt French fishermen by " compe- 

 tition " it was of little importance whether they had in theory "a 

 concurrent " right, since they would always be warned off by the 

 French. 



In point of fact, it appears that the result corresponded to this 

 view. Unc^er the treaties and the declaration of 1783, the particular 



[ For text of Convention, see Appendix to U. S. Case, Vol. I, p. 58.] 



