QUESTION SEVEN. 57 



coasts, apparently with a view of establishing an admission, by the 

 British Government, as to the interpretation of the treaty, in its 

 application to these coasts. 



Two paragraphs from this correspondence are cited to show that 

 Lord Iddesleigh had determined that United States fishermen had a 

 right to purchase bait in Canadian and Newfoundland harbours; 

 and that the British Ambassador at Washington had so informed 

 the United States Secretary of State. But there is nothing in the 

 facts to warrant either of these suggestions. 



The United States Case, after referring to the refusal of the colonial 



officials to permit the purchase of bait by the " Thomas F. Bayard " 



at Bonne Bay, Newfoundland, and by the " Mascotte " at Port 



Amherst in the Magdalen Islands, and to the warnings given to the 



vessels to depart, gives a quotation from letter (17th September, 



66 1886) addressed by the British Minister at Washington to Mr. 



Bayard as follows (the italics are not in the original letter) 



(United States Case, p. 193) : 



" On the arrival of your note in London, Her Majesty's secretary of 

 state for the colonies telegraphed to the officers administering the 

 Governments of Canada and Newfoundland calling attention to the 

 cases, and explaining that under the treaty of 1818 United States 

 fishermen have the right to fish off the coasts of the Magdalen Islands 

 and off certain coasts of Newfoundland, and stating that it was pre- 

 sumed that the customs oflicials in those places had not been instructed 

 in the same way as on other parts of the coast. 



" On the 25th ultimo the Governments of Canada and Newfound- 

 land were further instructed by dispatches from the colonial office to 

 make full reports on the subject of the complaints in question, and 

 it was recommended that special instructions should be issued to the 

 authorities at these places where the inshore fishery has been granted 

 by the convention of 1818 to the United States fishermen, calling their 

 attention to the provisions of that convention, and warning them 

 that no action contrary thereto may be taken in regard to United 

 States fishing vessels. 



"/ may add that information has been received that the warning 

 notices referred to by you were discontinued in the beginning of 

 August" 



To understand this letter it is necessary to bear in mind the sur- 

 rounding circumstances. 



By the treaty of 1871, all the Canadian and Newfoundland coast- 

 fisheries were opened to United States fishermen. In 1885 that 

 arrangement came to an end; the conditions of the 1818 treaty re- 

 vived ; and the Americans were restricted to the limits prescribed by it. 



A specimen of the warning notices referred to in the despatch of 

 the 17th September, 1886, quoted in the United States Case, is given 

 in that Case at p. 192. It is as follows : 



" I am instructed to give you notice that the presence of your vessel 

 in this port is in violation of the articles of the international conven- 



92909 S. Doc. 870, 61-3, vol 7 5 



