500 AMERICAN DIPLOMATIC QUESTIONS 



tion of them on other parts of the coast, a genuine compro- 

 mise had been effected. It is curious to note the light in 

 which this fishery clause was regarded by eminent statesmen 

 of the period, and indeed by many since. Never abandoning 

 the idea of John Quincy Adams that the United States pos- 

 sessed and always had possessed an inherent and natural 

 right to the inshore fisheries, a right that had survived the 

 operation of war, they firmly believed, and as solemnly ar- 

 gued that, by the convention of 1818, England granted no 

 fishery privileges to the United States, no rights of landing 

 to cure fish or to obtain supplies, but, on the contrary, the 

 United States had simply consented to certain restrictions on 

 those rights and privileges always possessed. This erroneous 

 conception of the spirit of the convention might be dismissed 

 as an innocent historical or legal curio, had it not vitally 

 affected the interpretation of the words, and later given rise 

 to much misunderstanding between England and the United 

 States. 



The adherents to this view found proof of their contentions 

 in that part of the fishery clause wherein the United States 

 expressly " renounces forever any liberty," etc. They urged 

 that in the use of these words Great Britain acknowledged 

 those preexisting and natural rights. The insertion of that 

 phrase had been insisted upon by our commissioners, Messrs. 

 Rush and Gallatin, and was reluctantly allowed by the Brit- 

 ish representatives, who were actuated by a strong desire to 

 settle the troublesome quarrels of the fishermen as quickly 

 as possible, and to remove the whole question from discussion. 

 This fallacious theory of a "natural and inherent right" has 

 never entirely lost its influence, even to the present day. 

 It has been defended by the ponderous arguments of many 

 legal writers, as it colored the deliberations of government 

 officials. 



With the promulgation of the new rules and regulations 

 of 1818, the future of American fishermen seemed particu- 

 larly bright. Congress encouraged them the following year 

 with increased bounties. The fisheries had suffered greatly 

 through the vicissitudes of war. Blissfully ignorant of, 



