714 CORRESPONDENCE, ETC. 



means of strand fishing, a mode of fishing to which, under the treaty 

 of Washington, they were not entitled to resort. 



The prosecution by them of the strand fishery being clearly in ex- 

 cess of their treaty privilege, Her Majesty's Government" cannot 

 doubt that, on further consideration, the United States Government 

 will not be disposed to support a claim in respect of the loss of the 

 fish which they had caught or might have caught by that process. 

 I have, &c., 



GRANVILLE. 



Mr. Evarts to Mr. Lowell. 



No. 109.] DEPARTMENT or STATE, 



Washington, February 4, 1881. 



SIR: Inclosed herein you will receive the affidavits of the masters 

 of two United States fishing vessels, detailing the acts of violence by 

 which they have been prevented from exercising their rights of fish- 

 ing in certain Newfoundland waters. 



You will observe that in these occurrences no questions arise as to 

 the character or force of local legislation. They exhibit simply and 

 distinctly the determination of the inhabitants of Newfoundland that 

 the fishermen of the United States shall not be permitted to exercise 

 the right of fishing guaranteed them by the treaty of Washington, 

 but shall be compelled to purchase from provincial fishermen the bait 

 which they are clearly entitled to catch. 



There is no question here of the size of the meshes of the seines, of 

 the right of fishing at limited periods, of the use of the strand as aux- 

 iliary to legitimate fishing. It is simply the denial by force of the 

 exercise of a right which is not disputed, but which is denied because 

 it interferes with the profits of provincial fishermen. There is no pre- 

 tense of the interference of lawful authority, general or local, but the 

 undisguised use of mob violence to prevent the exercise of an un- 

 doubted right secured by treaty to our fishermen. 



You will bring these complaints immediately to the attention of 

 Her Britannic Majesty's Government, and in doing so you will say 

 that the Government of the United States sees with a dissatisfaction 

 to which it is unwilling to give full expression this repeated and 

 continuous invasion of the rights of its citizens; that this rude and 

 persistent opposition to* the exercise of rights guaranteed by treaty, 

 and liberally paid for, is practically an abrogation of the very pro- 

 visions which the treaty was intended to secure, and that the Govern- 

 ment of the United States cannot permit the rights and interests of 

 its citizens to be thus subjected to the ill-temper and unlawful violence 

 of an excited mob. 



It can make no difference that these particular proceedings did not 

 culminate in acts of personal injury or in the destruction of property. 

 This has only been avoided by the fact that the United States fisher- 

 men, in a spirit of forbearance which cannot be too much commended, 

 but which cannot be always anticipated, have yielded to an exhibition 

 of force which they had not the power to resist. 



The Government of the United States cannot reject the conviction 

 that the protracted delay of Her Majesty's Government in the matter 



