178 



under no necessity whatever to give us that notitication. They 

 might have concluded the treaty without saying a word about the 

 iisheries. and then have told us that they had been forfeited by the 

 war. But they knew better. They knew that not only war, but 

 conqitest^ was necessary to wrest from us any right or liberty recog- 

 nised by them as belonging to us by the treaty of 1783. To accom- 

 plish this conquest, despairing to obtain from us an express renun- 

 ciation by treaty, as tliey had obtained it t>om Spain in 1763, they 

 tried to obtain it by means of our acquiescence in this notification ; 

 and they made it in indefinite terms, seeming to strike only at the 

 portion of the fisheries within their most restricted territorial ju- 

 risdiction, but susceptible, if once acquiesced in by us, of a con- 

 struction sanctioned by the whole history and public law relative 

 to those fisheries, which would deprive us of them all, including 

 those of the Grand Bank. 



The article proposed by Mr. Gallatm covered the whole ground 

 disputed by the adversary ; and the advantage of it to us, if pro- 

 posed and accepted, would have been, that we should have issued 

 from the war, with all the fishing rights and liberties, as enjoyed 

 before it, uncontested. When, therefore, during the discussion, 

 and before the vote had been taken, I offered to abandon this ad- 

 vantage, and to rest the future defence of the fishing rights and 

 Jiberties upon the distinct assertion that they had not been forfeited 

 or abrogated by the war, by thus resting it, 1 knew that it would 

 be necessary to defend them, afrer the conclusion of the peace — 

 to defend them against the power, and the policy, and the intel- 

 lect of Great Britain. It was placmg them all at the hazard of 

 future negotiation and another war : and i thought I offered a 

 signal concession, of deference to the mere sectional feelings of 

 one western member of the mission, by offering to accept the al- 

 ternative. But I felt the most entire confidence in the soundness 

 of the principle which I asserted. I knew that it was sufficient to 

 preserve the fishing rights and liberties from surrender. 1 was 

 content with it as a fulfilment of our express instructions ; and 1 

 relied upon the determined spirit and active energy of my country 

 to maintain it after the peace. I had no doubt of the ultimate re- 

 sult, so long as our assent to the British doctrine and notification 

 was neither expressed nor implied. 



My proposal was not however accepted, until, upon taking the 

 vote on the question whether the article proposed by Mr. Gallatin 

 should be offered to the British plenipotentiaries, it appeared there 

 was a majority of the mission in favour of it. This vote was taken 

 as has been stated, on the oth of November ; and on the 7th the 

 substitute, being the proposition which I had suggested on the 4th;^ 

 was offered by Mr. Clay, and unanimously accepted. The article 

 was not proposed to the British plenipotentiaries, nor was the con- 

 sideration of it ever after resumed. 



This transaction, therefore, was totally distinct from that of the 

 28th and 29th of November ; md as it terminated in no act of the 



