1782 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 



1st. Tbat the principal cause of difference between Canada and the United States has i ot 

 been removed by the treaty, but remains a subject for anxiety. 



2d!y. That a cession of territorial rights of great value has been made to the United States, 

 not only without the previous assent of Canada, but contrary to the expressed wishes of the 

 Canadian Government. 



The committee of the Privy Council will submit their views on both those points for the 

 information of Her Majesty's "Government, in the hope that by means of discussion a more 

 (atisfactory understanding between the two governments may be arrived at. The Earl of 

 Kimberley has referred to the rules laid down in Article 6 of the Treaty of Washington, as to 

 the international duties of neutral governments, as being of special importance to the Do- 

 minion ; but the committee of the Privy Council, judging from past experience, are much 

 more apprehensive of misunderstanding, owing to the apparent difference of opinion between 

 Canada and the United States as to the relative duties of friendly states in a time of peace. 

 It is unnecessary to enter into any lengthened discussion of the conduct of the United States 

 during the last six or seven years, with reference to the organization of considerable num- 

 bers of the citizens of those States under the designation of Fenians. The views of the 

 Canadian Government on this subject are in possession of Her Majesty's Government ; and 

 it appears from the Protocol of Conference between the High Commissioners that the British 

 Commissioners presented the claims of the people of Canada, and were instructed to state 

 that they weie regarded by Her Majesty's Government as coming within the class of sub- 

 jects indicated by Sir Edward Thornton in his letter of '26th January last, as subjects for the 

 consideration of the Joint High Commissioners. The Earl of Kimberley states that it was 

 with much regret that Her Majesty's Government acquiesced in the omission of these claims 

 from the general settlement ot outstanding questions between Great Britain and the United 

 States ; and the committee of the Privy Council, while fully participating in that regret, 

 must add that the fact that this Fenian organization is still in full vigor, and that there seems 

 no reason to hope that the United States Government will perform its duty as a friendly neigh- 

 bor any better in the future than in the past, leads them to entertain a just apprehension that 

 theout.-tandiu subject of difference with the United States is the one of all others which is of 

 special importance to the Dominion. They must add that they are not aware that during 

 the existence of this Fenian organization, which for nearly seven years has been a cause of 

 irritation and expense to the people of Canada, Her Majesty's Government have made any 

 vigorous effort to induce the Government of the United States to perform its duty to a 

 neighboring people, who earnestly desire to live with them on terms of amity, and who dur- 

 ing the civil war loyally performed all the duties of neutrals to the expressed satisfaction of 

 the Government of the United States. On the contrary, while, in the opinion of the govern- 

 ment and the entire people of Canada, the Government of the United States neglected, until 

 much too late, to take the necessary measures to prevent the Fenian invasion of 1870, Her 

 Majesty's Government hastened to acknowledge, by cable telegram, the prompt action of 

 the President, and to thank him for it. The committee of the Privy Council will only add, 

 on this painful subject, that it is one on which the greatest unanimity exists among all classes 

 of the people throughout the Dominion, and the failure of the High Commissioners to deal 

 with it has been one cause of the prevailing dissatisfaction with the Treaty of Washington. 



The committee of the Privy Council will proceed to the consideration of the other subject 

 of dissatisfaction in Canada, viz, the cession to citizens of the United States of the right to 

 the life of the inshore lisheries in common with the people of Canada. The Earl of Kimber- 

 ley, after observing that the Canadian Government took the initiative in suggesting that a 

 joint British and American Commission should be appointed, with a view to settle the dis- 

 putes which had arisen as to the interpretation of the Treaty of 1858, proceeds to state that 

 "the causes of the difficulty lay deeper than any question of interpretation," that "the dis- 

 rOMion of such points as the correct definition of bays could not lead to a friendly agreement 

 with the United States," and that " it was necessary therefore to endeavor to find an equiva- 

 lent which the United States might be willing to give in return for the fishery privileges." 



In the- foregoing opinion of the Earl of Kimberley, the committee of the Privy Council are 

 unable to concur, and they cannot but regret that no opportunity was afforded them or'com- 

 imiiiicatiiip to her Majesty's Government their views on a subject of so much importance to 

 Canada, prior to the meeting of the Joint High Commission. 



\\ hen the Canadian Government took the initiative of suggesting the appointment of a 

 :i*h iiii'l American Commission, they never contemplated the surrender of their terri- 

 torial riphtH, and they had no reason to suppose that Her Majesty's Government entertained 

 emimenti expressed by tin- Earl of Kimberley in his recent dispatch. Had such senti- 

 mrnt* iM*n expressed to the delegate appointed by the Canadian Government to confer with 



lord.-hip a few months before the appointment of the Commission, it would at least have 



Wen in their power to have remonstrated against the cession of the inshore fisheries; and it 



d moreover have prevented any member of the Canadian Government from acting as a 



member >f the Joint High Commission, unless on the clear understanding that no such ces- 



ion should be embodied iu the treaty without their consent. The expediency of the cession 



i common right to the inshore fisheries has been defended on the ground that such a 



on the part of Canada should be made in the interests of peace. The committee of 



! Privy Council, as they have already observed, would have been prepared to recommend 



