486 MISCELLANEOUS 



tinuance of the fisheries. With regard to the prohibition of the sale 

 of bait fishes to American vessels and of the capture of such fish by 

 the fishermen of this colony, when intended for sale to foreigners, this 

 government observed that the principles involved in such restrictions 

 were approved by His Majesty's Government in 1887, when the Bait 

 Act came into operation, and the principle had been carried into 

 practice for many years against the subjects of France who visited 

 the coasts of this colony to engage in the fisheries, exception only 

 being made in certain localities when it was made manifest to the 

 government that an injury would accrue to the fishermen of this 

 colony by a strict enforcement of the act. The revenue and customs 

 laws were ever enforced against American vessels entering the ter- 

 ritorial waters of the colony to engage in its fisheries up to last year, 

 when for the first time the captains of American vessels objected to 

 complying with these laws, and out of deference to the wish ex- 

 pressed by His Majesty's Ministers this government abstained from 

 enforcing them. Up to 1905, with but few exceptions, American 

 vessels had conformed with our fishery regulations, and, as had been 

 pointed out in a previous Minute of Council, the State Department 

 at Washington by official instruments had enjoined on the United 

 States fishermen the duty of respecting these regulations. It was 

 submitted, therefore, that there was nothing in the policy of this 

 government that was new or novel, or that should occasion difficulty 

 or embarrassment to His Majesty's Government. This government 

 further pointed out that the Foreign Fishing Vessels Act, 1906, which 

 was passed in order to meet the views of His Majesty's Government 

 in respect to sections 1 and 3 of the act of 1905, as well as to enable 

 the government of this colony to restrain the fishermen of this colony 

 from engaging themselves to Americans to catch bait fishes, would, 

 by being brought into force by proclamation, remove that which 

 appeared to be the principal, if not the only, objection to the 1905 act, 

 and obviate the necessity of the proposed modus vivendi, the main 

 provisions of which, as set forth in the despatch from the Secretary 

 of State of the 3rd September, dealt with sections 1 and 3 of the 

 1905 act. 



This government further pointed out that the colony had never 

 exacted duties in respect of goods on board United States vessels 

 necessary for the prosecution of the fishery and support of the fish- 

 ermen during the voyages to and from the fishing ground, and 

 neither was any such action contemplated. It was respectfully sub- 

 mitted that thp. extract from Lord Kimberly's speech in the House 

 of Lords in 1891, justifying the modus vivendi with France was 

 scarcely applicable to the case under discussion. Lord Knutsford, 

 in introducing that measure, and Lord Kimberly, in supporting the 

 same, had set forth that it was impossible to avoid such legislation, 

 " first and principally because it had been discovered that in fact 

 that there existed at the time no lawful mode of enforcing His 

 Majesty's treaty obligations -in Newfoundland," the act which gave 

 the necessary power having been allowed to lapse. Further, the 

 right of British subjects to erect permanent structures on the treaty 

 shore had been questioned. Great excitement and bad feeling had 

 been aroused by the removal and destruction of such properties, and 

 it was by reason of these circumstances that the modus vivendi of 

 1891 was regarded by both political parties in England as absolutely 



