ARGUMENT OF CHARLES B, WARREN. 1101 



John Quincy Adams was the American Minister in Great Britain 

 at this time, and it will be recalled that he had been one of the 

 negotiators of the Treaty of Ghent, and that he, therefore, was en- 

 tirely familiar with the claims of the United States in regard to the 

 North Atlantic fisheries,, 



The Secretary of State advised Mr. Adams of the incident, as will 

 be seen in a note printed in the Appendix to the Case of the United 

 States on p. 263 : and after notifying him of this warning given by 

 this British sloop the " Jaseur " which was promptly stated to be 

 without any authority whatever the Secretary of State wrote to 

 Mr. Adams: 



" It is sufficient to observe here, that the right of the United States 

 to take fish on the coat of Newfoundland, and on the coasts, bays 

 and creeks of all other of His Britannic Majesty's dominions in Amer- 

 ica, and to dry and cure fish in any of the unsettled bays, harbors, and 

 creeks of Nova Scotia, Magdalen islands, and Labrador in short, 

 that every right appertaining to the fisheries, which were secured by 

 the treaty of 1783, stands now as unshaken and perfect as it then did, 

 constituting a vital part of our political existence, and resting on the 

 same solid foundation as our independence itself." 



And he added, as appears on p. 264 of the same Appendix : 



" It can scarcely be presumed that the British Government, after 

 the result of the late experiment, in the present state of Europe, and 

 under its other engagements, can seriously contemplate a renewal of 

 hostilities. But it often happens with nations, as well as with indi- 

 viduals, that a just estimate of its interest and duties is not an 

 infallible criterion of its conduct. We ought to be prepared at every 

 point to guard against such an event. You will be attentive to cir- 

 cumstances, and give us timely notice of any danger which may be 

 menaced." 



This observation, like many others of a similar nature, is only 

 important at this late day for the reason that it furnishes a just 

 measure of the importance attached to this fishery question by the 

 people of the United States during the period under consideration. 

 The North Atlantic fisheries were inseparably connected with the 

 struggle for Independence, and were regarded, as stated by Mr. 

 Monroe, as constituting a vital part of our political existence, and 

 resting on the same solid foundation as our Independence itself. 



These views, as I say, are only important as throwing light upon 

 the construction of the renunciatory clause of the treaty of 1818. 

 It is not, I submit, to be readily concluded that the United States 

 would surrender vital liberties, or make a concession, asnow con- 

 strued by Great Britain, that gave up, without a struggle, important 

 national rights, the surrender of which to the extent now contended 

 had never been asked ; nor is it to be easily believed that this sur- 

 render was made by Plenipotentiaries instructed by the President of 



