ARGUMENT OF SIB WILLIAM EOBSON. 1643 



Now, that is what these words do. 



Supposing we had made some regulation, the reasonableness of 

 which was contested, and in the absence of a Tribunal such as we 

 have the good fortune now to possess, our answer would have been, 

 after all, this regulation which you complain of as unreasonable is 

 one which applies to our own subjects too, so you need not be afraid, 

 you need not be afraid that we shall impose unjust or unfair regula- 

 tions and burdens upon them, so we will put in these words which 

 protect us both, and they put in the words " in common with British 

 subjects " which, first of all, affirm British jurisdiction, and secondly, 

 supply a measure or test of reasonableness. They are for the protec- 

 tion of both parties. They prevent our being able, if we happen to 

 be the stronger Power, as we were then (I should not like to say any 

 Power is stronger than the United States now) it prevented any 

 prospect of friction or conflict, because there was an easy test, as to 

 whether our regulations were reasonable or not, and the words are put 

 in with that view, and put in certainly with that effect. 



The suggestion that they were put in because we were afraid that 

 having given this liberty, the then United States of America would 

 turn around and say : You shall not fish at all on the coasts of your 

 own islands, you, the greatest naval power in the world in the year 

 1818, is an impossible supposition. 



Mr. Turner drew attention very pleasantly to our condition in 

 1783, and read a speech from Lord Shelburne, in which Lord Shel- 

 burne spoke of sleepness nights, spoke of the condition of the British 

 Empire in that year, and intimated, that after all, England had to 

 take what it could get in 1783. 



Well, there is this to be said for England even then. We were not 

 very far from the beginning of the greatest conflict of modern times, 

 1792, when England stood for more than a decade, right up to 1815, 

 engaged in continual and colossal war. Her resources, even in 1783, 

 were not quite so depleted as Mr. Turner seemed to think they were. 

 Anyhow, we seem to have been in a condition to do a good deal be- 

 tween that date and Waterloo. 



But in 1818 what was our condition, and at the end of that war? 



This titanic battle between the land and the sea had come to an 

 end, and it had come to an end in favour of the maritime Power. 

 There was no Power in the world so well situated for a conflict, if 

 conflict were needed, as Great Britain. The conflict was not needed, 

 and not desired. Great Britain desired to make a reasonable treaty, 

 it had no pugnacious desire. The British lion, to which Mr. Turner 

 referred, is, in my humble view of him, a peaceful, domestic animal, 

 and has always been endeavouring to live as such when he was let 

 alone; certainly, in 1818 he was endeavouring to make peace which 

 should be a basis of permanent conciliation between Great Britain 



