382 MISCELLANEOUS 



facilitate the settlement of the questions now pending in this con- 

 nection. 



I have, &c., WM. MACGREGOR. 



[Inclosure.] 

 [Extract from Evening Telegram, St. John's, Newfoundland, March 2, 1907.] 



Editor Evening Telegram: 



MR. EDITOR : I have read the lengthy and lucid debate on the ques- 

 tion of the Modus Vivendi. It is not to express any opinion on the 

 debate that I now write. On that point I will merely say that in my 

 humble judgment it is a splendid display of Parliamentary eloquence 

 and argumentation, and I think it would do credit to any Colonial 

 Parliament of the Empire. 



My object now, however, is to broach a new idea. It may be 

 thought that nothing is left to be said on the main question. Yet it 

 seems to me there is something yet to be said. 



Throughout the whole debate the assumption was accepted as an 

 axiom or a postulate that there is to be a Modus Vivendi, or a Treaty 

 between us and the United States. That the Americans are to have 

 Treaty rights on pur shore for all time to come. 



Why should this be so ? I maintain that it should not be so. That 

 their Treaty rights must be ended as the French rights were. 



Of what use was it for us to fight for two centuries in order to 

 shake off the incubus of the French rights if we are to be encumbered 

 for all time with the American rights? 



We don't want to have an American shore no more than we did a 

 French shore. We want a Newfoundland shore only in this island 

 home of ours ! 



This may be thought wild and impracticable language. Why so? 

 What is there more sacred and indissoluble about the Treaty of 1818 

 than about the Treaty of Versailles, 1783? The difference in their 

 ages is not so great. Both smell of the musty past. Both are out 

 or date. If the Treaty of Utrecht had become so obsolete by the lapse 

 of time that the British Government had at last to wipe it off the 

 slate, why should not the same doctrine apply to the American Treaty 

 of 1818? 



England must be asked to relieve us of this burdensome Treaty as 

 she did that of the French. Let her settle it as she may with 

 America. Let her give whatever compensation is deemed just, and 

 then we ourselves will deal with the Americans. It is preposterous 

 that we should be bound down by Treaties made a hundred years 

 ago, and which do not suit present circumstances. 



I read recently in a very influential and representative American 

 newspaper, The New York Times, an article from which I extract the 

 following sentiments: 



"Americans, who strive to keep an open mind, and to deal with the 

 question upon which they cannot help forming an opinion, solely 

 upon its merits. * * * Of what avail to recite to such Americans 

 the history of", (an ancient Treaty). "Every man, woman and 

 child whose interests were affected -by that instrument has long since 



