BRITISH, COLONIAL, AND OTHER CORRESPONDENCE, ETC. 435 



they passed that measure. Was the country prepared to pay that 

 price for the Bond-Hay Convention? And not only did he object 

 to it because it was not in any way a permanent policy, but he ob- 

 jected to it because he considered it to mean a destruction of the 

 herring trade and several other trades of the country. Was the 

 country ready to pay so dearly for a treaty it had never seen? 



Rt. Hon. PREMIER. The treaty was before the house. 



Mr. MORINE. The Bond-Blaine treaty was before the house, but 

 not this one. 



Rt. Hon. PREMIER. Yes, it was. 



Mr. MORINE. The Bond-Hay treaty was not before the house 

 completely. Certain amendments had been made of which the house 

 knows nothing. The house had been expressly told that certain 

 changes had been made, but these changes were not put before it. 

 Now, what was given this colony for the price it was paying? In 

 the first place the market of the United States was not worth the 

 price. No treaty with the United States of the nature of reciprocity 

 ever had good effects. There has already been more than one such 

 treaty, but no good results flowed therefrom. The American 

 market for fish was not worth anything. There had been a lot of 

 bombast about the 80,000,000 people of the United States supposed 

 to be 80,000,000 fish eaters to whom the fishermen of this country 

 were going to sell their fish. But the practical men of Water street, 

 the practical men in this house, the practical business men through- 

 out the whole country, will tell you that that market is of no value 

 to Newfoundland. What advantage to Newfoundland would the 

 abrogation of the American duty on fish be ? It would simply have 

 the effect of reducing the price of fish to the American consumer. 

 It would injure the American fishermen, but do the Newfoundland 

 fishermen no good. Who supplied the American market at the present 

 time? Not Newfoundland fishermen, not Canadian fishermen. The 

 American market was supplied by the American fisherman himself. 

 Under the Bond-Hay treaty you will have to supply the foreigner 

 with bait freely. There would not even be a license fee, and the 

 return given Newfoundland for that privilege was a market value- 

 less to this country. He opposed the bill before the house for an- 

 other reason also, and that was because it was illegal. It was 

 provocative of litigation, not merely in its details, but essentially. 

 To carry out the measure certain definite things had to be done, if 

 they could be done. But they could not be done, because it was 

 illegal to do them. They could not be done in this country because 

 the treaty conditions of this colony were such as not to permit them. 

 Just read the first section : 



"Any justice of the peace, sub-collector, preventive officer, fishery 

 warden or constable may go on aboard any foreign fishing vessel 

 being within any port on the coasts of this Island or hovering in 

 British waters within three marine miles of any of the coasts, bays, 

 creeks, or harbors in this Island and may bring such foreign fishing 

 vessel into port, may search her cargo, and may examine the master 

 upon oath touching the cargo and voyage." 



Do you think you will be allowed to do that? Do you think 



that the American people are going to allow you to treat a vessel 



of theirs lying in Bay of Islands, for instance, in that way? Do 



you think that the American people are going to permit a common 



92909 S. Doc. 870, 61-3, vol 6 36 



