1480 NORTH ATLANTIC COAST FISHERIES ARBITRATION. 



statement concerning the action of the British Ministers, the last 

 paragraph : 



" Now, then, having briefly reviewed our rights and privileges 

 under responsible government, and also the limitations that the 

 Crown has placed upon the same, I would observe that if we, as 

 colonists, had been guilty of asserting rights which do not attach to 

 us and had persisted in disregarding solemn obligations contained in 

 treaties, or in setting at nought imperial acts of Parliament, then we 

 should have forfeited our rights under the constitution and have de- 

 served to be overridden. But even under such conditions any curtail- 

 ment or suspension of our laws could, I submit, only take place at the 

 hands of the Parliament of Great Britain, for Parliament alone has 

 the power to limit or annul the laws of this colony when once ap- 

 proved by the Crown. If this is not the correct position, and His 

 Majesty's Ministers have the power by a diplomatic arrangement to 

 set aside the statutes of this colony and to dispose of its resources, 

 then the constitution of which we have been so proud is something 

 totally different from what we have believed it to be, and in very fact 

 responsible government in the colonies is a mere delusion. 



" If, on the other hand, it shall be shown that His Majesty's Minis- 

 ters had not lawful authority to deal thus with this colony, and that 

 the modus vivendi was an instrument entirely ultra vires within the 

 jurisdiction of this colony, then it is clear that an attempt has been 

 made to overide the constitutional rights of this people, and this gov- 

 ernment was justified in resisting each attempt by every constitu- 

 tional means at its disposal." 



And at the bottom of p. 467, again, as to the spirit that underlay 

 this entire crusade : 



" The people in Newfoundland, like those of Canada, desire to use 

 the right to withhold a supply of bait as a means of inducing the 

 American Government to remove the import duties on British fish." 



And he cites Des Voeux to the Colonial Office, 4th January, 1887, 

 with approval, quoting: 



"American fishermen are protected in the markets of the United 

 States, which take all their products, by a duty of 56 cents per 

 quintal, which is almost prohibitive to the results of British in- 

 dustry ; " 



He goes on at p. 469 to recite the failure of the Hay-Bond Treaty, 

 or rather to show that it was still before the Senate at the bottom 

 of p. 469 : 



" In 1902 I was in England in connection with His Majesty's coro- 

 nation and the conference of colonial premiers, and after those func- 

 tions were over I availed myself of the opportunity of pressing upon 

 the then Secretary of State for the Colonies Mr. Chamberlain the 

 unfairness of the treatment that had been meted out to us a colony." 



I think I need not read it all. He says that he was authorised to 

 go to Washington, and the result was the Hay-Bond Treaty; and 

 then, at the top of p. 470 : 



