BEITISH, COLONIAL AND OTHER CORRESPONDENCE, ETC. 425 



of those rights, we challenge the commendation and respect of all 

 those within this colony and beyond its borders whose judgment is 

 influenced by considerations of justice and patriotism. I beg to move 

 the second reading of the bill. 



EEPLY OF MR. MORINE TO PREMIER BOND'S SPEECH OP APRIL 7, 1905. [] 



FRIDAY, April 7, 1905. 



HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS. 



Mr. MORTNE moved that the bill be read that day six months. He 

 thought that the legislature and the people of the country should 

 have time to consider what was its real meaning in order to under- 

 stand that it was essential that they should know the rights of the 

 respective parties and their own rights on the one hand and those of 

 the Americans on the other. Now, the Premier had stated that he 

 had arrived at an interpretation of the treaty of 1818, which he, 

 the Premier, had never before seen advanced, but which he was satis- 

 fied was a correct one, and for which he had stated some reasons. 

 He, Mr. Morine, would say that however desirous the house might 

 be to accept that interpretation, because it would very much narrow 

 American rights and increase our own in our waters, he did not 

 think that any lawyer would for a moment believe the Premier's 

 point was well taken. The very fact that it had not been taken since 

 1818 was at once an argument and an answer. If there had been 

 anything in that interpretation it would not have been left to the 

 discovery of a layman in the year 1905, almost 100 years after the 

 making of the treaty. And furthermore, the fact that this interpre- 

 tation had not been acted on for upwards of one hundred years would 

 be a sufficient answer. In fact, if there had been, originally, any 

 meaning in such a petty interpretation of the words, the advantage 

 had long been lost by the custom in usage of the two countries. The 

 fact that such an interpretation had never been made before, but left 

 until that date to be discovered by a layman, however eminent, would 

 agree with the contention that there was nothing in it. The states- 

 men of the United States, Canada or Great Britain had never placed 

 such an interpretation upon it. The interpretation of the Premier as 

 to rights of the Americans was based on the fact that in one place 

 the treaty referred to the rights on the Newfoundland coast between 

 Ramea and Quirpon; and later on, when speaking of Labrador, it- 

 said not only coast, but further added the words bays, harbors and 

 creeks, words which had not been put in with reference to Newfound- 

 land. The Premier would argue, from the fact that the word coast 

 if followed by the words bays, harbors and creeks, when referring 

 to Labrador, the right to fish on the coast of Newfoundland, did not 

 imply the right to use the bays, harbors and creeks of the said coast. 

 Now, he, Mr. M., would like some seafaring man to show him the 

 difference between the coast and bays; where the coast ended, and the 

 bays commenced. What was the coast from Cape Race to Burin? 



[ Extract from the St. John's (Newfoundland) Evening Telegram, April 

 11, 1905.] 



