124 CASE OF THE UNITED STATES. 



unpleasant results; that courtesj'' demanded that after the right of 

 fishing had been claimed and exercised for thirty years, (whether 

 rightfully or wrongfully,) such notice should be given to the govern- 

 ment of the United States as would enable it to seasonably proclaim 

 to all concerned the intentions of the British government. I further 

 stated that this measure taken at this time, when the whole American 

 fishing-fleet was upon the provincial coast, would appear to have 

 been intended (whether really so or not) to coerce the United States 

 into a system of trade which, it is well known, the provinces have 

 long sought for. I further stated that I was personally in favor of a 

 comprehensive and reciprocal system of trade between the United 

 States and the British North American provinces; but that a 

 measure of so much importance, involving so various interests, 

 could not be matured and executed without allowing time. I said 

 that this whole (question was at present receiving much attention, not 

 only in the provmces, but in all the States of the Union; that a com- 

 mittee of the House of Representatives had it under consideration, 

 and that I had understood that they were about to report a bill, or 

 at least to make a report. If wisely arranged, I said that I thought 

 the measure would prove conducive to the interests of both countries; 

 and I could not but regret still more that the apparently hostile 

 attitude of her Majesty's ministers would retard its adoption. I 

 said that under all the circumstances I could not but think that this 

 apparent measure of coercion was hastily adopted, and without that 

 deliberation and forethought which had usually characterized the 

 proceedings of British statesmen, and which was becoming a nation 

 acting towards those with whom they were in a state of amicable 

 peace, if not friendship even. I felt, therefore, I added, that under 

 all the circumstances a mistake had been committed in ordering a 

 fleet to those waters, and that I hoped the instructions to the several 

 authorities in the provinces and to the admiral, would be so far 

 modified as to open the way to a final and equitable settlement of the 

 question. 



With this the interview of the 7th terminated." 



On August 10, 1852, three da3''s after this interview, Lord Malmes- 

 bury wrote to Mr. Cramp ton at Washington, with reference to the 

 publication of Mr. Webster's letter, instructing him to inform Mr. 

 Webster that "Her Majesty's government must necessarily enter- 

 tain the sincerest regret that such a publication should have been 

 made without what appears to her Majesty's government, sufficient 

 inquiiy into the circumstances of the case," and explaining "how 

 greatly this question of the protection of British fisheries has been 

 misunderstood and misinterpreted in the United States," and after 

 reviewing the situation he says, in repetition of what Mr. Lawrence 

 had already reported that he said to him — 



Her Majesty's government, so far from having any intention of 

 now excluding American fishermen from the Bay of Fundy, are pre- 



a Appendix, pp. 517, 518. 



