174 CASE OF THE UNITED STATES. 



thereon. It is deemed reasonable and desirable that both the United 

 States and British fishermen should pay a like respect to such laws 

 and regulations which are designed to preserve and increase the pro- 

 ductiveness of the fisheries on those coasts. Such being the object 

 of these laws and regulations, the observance of them is enforced upon 

 the citizens of the United States in the like manner as they are ob- 

 served by British subjects. By granting the mutual use of the 

 inshore fisheries, neither party has yielded its right to civic jurisdic- 

 tion over a marine league along its coasts. 



"Its laws are as obligatory upon the citizens or subjects of the other 

 as upon its own. The laws of the British provinces, not in conflict 

 with the provisions of the reciprocity treaty, would be as binding 

 upon the citizens of the United States v/ithin that jurisdiction as upon 

 British subjects. Should they be so framed or executed as to make 

 any discrinjination in favor of British fishermen, or to impair the 

 rights secured to American fishermen by that treaty, those injuriously 

 affected by them will appeal to this government for redress. 



"In presenting complaints of this kind, should there be cause for 

 doing so, they are requested to furnish the Department of State with 

 a copy of the law or regulation which is alleged injuriously to affect 

 their rights or to make an unfair discrimination between the fisher- 

 men of the respective countries, or with a statement of any supposed 

 grievance in the execution of such law or regulation, in order that the 

 matter may be arranged by the two governments. 



"You will make this direction known to the masters of such fishing 

 vessels as belong to your port in such manner as you may deem most 

 advisable. 



(Signed) "W. L. Marcy. 



"Collector of the Cvstoms, Boston." 



I have the honor to inclose a copy of an act passed by the colonial 

 legislature of Newfoundland, on the 27th March, 1862, for the pro- 

 tection of the herring and salmon fisheries on the coast, and a copy of 

 cap. 102 of the consolidated statutes of Newfoundland, passed in 1872. 

 The first section of the act of 1862, prohibiting the takmg of herrings 

 with a seine between the 20th day of October and the 12th day of 

 April, and, further, prohibited the use of seines at any time for the 

 purpose of barring herrings. These regulations, which were in force 

 at the date of the Treaty of Washington, were not abolished, but con 

 firmed by the subsequent statutes, and are binding under the treaty 

 upon the citizens of the United States in common with British 

 subjects. 



The United States fishermen, therefore, in landing for the pur- 

 pose of fishing at Tickle Beach, in using a seine at a prohibited time, 

 and in barring herrings with seines from the shore exceeded their 

 treaty privileges, and were engaged in unlawful acts. 



Her Majesty's Government have no wish to insist on any illiberal 

 construction of the language of the treaty, and would not consider it 

 necessary to make any formal complaint on the subject of a casual in- 

 fringement of the letter of its stipulations which did not involve any 

 substantial detriment to British interests and to the fishery in general. 



An excess on the part of the United States fishermen of the precise 

 limit of the rights secured to them might proceed as much from 

 ignorance as from wilfulness; but the present claim for compensa- 



