506 MISCELLANEOUS 



terms as your own people, and we expect you to recognize our treaty 

 rights just as we recognise your fishery laws. Accordingly they have 

 come back to take advantage of their rights under the treaty of 1818. 



When two years ago this policy against the American fishermen 

 was first passed, it was not regarded with the same importance as it 

 is to-day. The Yankees were told that the Newfoundland Govern- 

 ment's definition of the treaty meant that they had certain privileges 

 in our waters on the "West Coast and on the Labrador, but were not 

 to enter our bays, harbours and creeks, nor to take fish as they wish, 

 but that the methods and gear by which they were to fish were to be 

 regulated by us. The Americans refused to be bound by this con- 

 struction of the treaty proclaimed, they never made any treaty with 

 us, and recognized no right of ours to interfere with their fishing and 

 appealed to the Imperial Government for its definition of the terms 

 they possessed. For the last twelve months the American and British 

 Governments have been discussing this question and endeavouring to 

 reach an agreement, but as last fall's herring fishery was about to 

 begin and quarrels might arise between the fishermen of both coun- 

 tries, and the negotiations were not completed they decided to make 

 a modus vivendi for the herring fishing season this spring. The 

 British Government argued reasonably enough that if the conditions 

 existing had been borne for 20 or 30 years the continuance for another 

 twelve months would not seriously injure anybody and it would 

 insure peace during the fishing season and pave the way for a settle- 

 ment before another year comes around. That really is the position 

 here to-night. There is no great international and constitutional 

 question involved as the members of this house have been told, nor 

 does it involve any disloyalty to our island home to oppose this 

 address to-night. He, Mr. Cashin, was as loyal to his native land as 

 any man in this house and he saw no reason or justification for the 

 arguments of the Government, that any man who opposed this address 

 was false to the country or its welfare. His. Mr. Cashin's, knowledge 

 might be limited, but that was the view he took of the matter. And 

 he had before him the example of the Premier, who 20 years ago 

 opposed the Bait act as strongly as he now advocated it. On this 

 question of the bait act a great deal might be said. The house had 

 been told by the Finance Minister yesterday that Newfoundland 

 holds the key to the bait supply of the ftorth Atlantic, but if that was 

 so how did it happen that last spring many of our vessels had to go 

 to the Magdalen Islands to procure bait? He, Mr. Cashin, would 

 challenge Capt. Lewis to say if this was not the case. 



Capt. LEWIS said that only a few of our vessels baited there and the 

 majority certainly on our coast. 



Mr. CASHIN. Capt. Lewis's " few " might mean a great many, at any 

 rate we know that in one day 150 vessels baited at the Magdalene 

 Islands, and if we hold the key of this bait supply of the North At- 

 lantic, why did our vessels have to go out of our waters to secure 

 their supplies of bait? He had listened with patience to the clap-trap 

 about the bait reserve of the North Atlantic, and might ask Mr. 

 Jackman what has happened to the banking fleet of Placentia? 

 Twenty years ago Placentia boasted of a fleet or thirty vessels. What 

 has become of them? They are gone as well as the Frenchmen. 

 Where are the forty bankers of the Southern Shore; the large fleet 

 of Bay Bulls, Trinity, Catalina and Bona vista ? Where are they all 



