1312 NORTH ATLANTIC COAST FISHERIES ARBITRATION. 



earnest protest to Her Majesty's Government against such arbitrary, 

 unlawful, unwarranted and unfriendly action on the part of the 

 Canadian government and its officials, and have instructed Mr. 



Phelps to given notice that the Government of Great Britain 

 791 will be held liable for all losses and injuries to citizens of the 



United States and their property caused by the unauthorized 

 and unfriendly action of the Canadian officials to which I have re- 

 ferred." 



The next protest does relate to the seizure of vessels between head- 

 lands, but it is dated the 14th June, and the amendment of the cir- 

 cular that is alleged to have been made in consequence of the protest 

 was made prior to the 8th June ; so that this protest, at all events, did 

 not bring about the amendment of the circular. 



I continue to read from p. 194 of the United States Argument : 



" The Secretary of State addressed another note to the British 

 minister on June 14, 1886 : 



" ' It becomes my duty, in bringing this information to your notice, 

 to request that if any such orders for interference with the unques- 

 tionable rights of the American fishermen to pursue their business 

 without molestation at any point not within three marine miles of the 

 shores, and within the defined limits as to which renunciation of the 

 liberty to fish was expressed in the treaty of 1818, may have been 

 issued, the same may at once be revoked as violative of the rights of 

 citizens of the United States under convention with Great Britain.' " 



That letter is dated, as I say, after the amendment of the circular, 

 and is quite apart from the subject discussed in the two previous let- 

 ters. It was replied to (United States Case Appendix, p. 823) by 

 the simple statement that there were no such instructions : 



" In reply, I have to request you to acquaint Mr. Bayard that Her 

 Majesty's Government have ascertained that no instructions to this 

 effect have been issued by the Canadian Government, but that a fur- 

 ther report is expected upon the subject." 



The United States Argument goes on, at this same page, 194 : 



" Earl Granville, in a despatch, dated June 3, 1886, transmitted to 

 Lord Lansdowne the protest, which the minister of the United States 

 had made against the provisions of circular No. 371 above referred 

 to; and subsequently, as a result of this protest, the circular was 

 amended by substituting in place of the last clause the following : " 



If the Tribunal will be kind enough to observe, the protest was 

 sent from England to Canada on the 3rd June, and that protest is, 

 of course, not the protest of the 14th June, which immediately pre- 

 cedes because it was sent on the 3rd June. The protest is the one 

 dated the 29th May, 1886 on the previous page. And as a result 

 of this protest, that is, of some protest before the 3rd June, any 

 way, the circular was amended by substituting in place of the last 

 clause the following. 



