120 CASE OF THE UNITED STATES. 



Stanley to Lord Falkland, of the 19th May, 1845, ever be published, I 

 apprehend that it will not only still more plainly show this, which 

 is apparent from the fragment of it that has appeared at Halifax, 

 but also that the reasonableness of the American argument had been 

 practically recognised by her Majesty's government." 



Great Britain's attempt to harmonize, if possible, the differences 

 between the two Governments on the questions which had arisen up 

 to this time under the treat}^, by relaxing the strict construction with 

 respect to bays, so far as the Bay of Fundy was concerned, was sup- 

 plemented by the suggestion that counter concessions to British 

 trade should be inade on the part of the United States, and negotia- 

 tions subsequently undertaken along the lines of this suggestion 

 ultimately led to the settlement of the fisheries c^uestion for the time 

 being by the mutual extension of trade and fisheries concessions 

 under the reciprocity treaty of 1854. 



In Lord Aberdeen's note of March 10, 1845, to Mr. Everett, com- 

 municating to him the proposed relaxation of the construction 

 adopted by Great Britain with respect to bays, he opens the ques- 

 tion of reciprocal concessions as follows: 



In thus communicating to Mr. Everett the liberal intentions of 

 her Majesty's government, the undersigned desires to call Mr. Ever- 

 ett's attention to the fact that the produce of the Labor of the British 

 colonial fishernuBn is at the present moment excluded by prohibitory 

 duties on the part of the United States from the markets of that 

 country; and the undersigned would submit to Mr. Everett that the 

 moment at which the British government are making a liberal con- 

 cession to United States' trade might well be deemed favorable for a 

 counter concession on the part of the United States to British trade, 

 by the reduction of the duties which operate so prejudicially to the 

 interests of the British colonial fishermen.'' 



Mr. Everett informed Lord Aberdeen in his note of March 25, 1845, 

 that he was "without instructions wliich enable him to make any 

 definite reply to this suggestion, ' ' and the suggestion was not carried 

 further at that time for the reason no doubt that Great Britain's 

 intention of proposing a further relaxation of the strict construction 

 with respect to all the other bays was prevented by the opposition 

 of Nova Scotia. 



a Appendix, pp. 537-539. b Appendix, p. 489. 



