1224 MISCELLANEOUS. 



ments, and in which no disturbance of a right exercised without ques- 

 tion for fifty years from the treaty of 1783 ought to be attempted by 

 any subordinate authority. Even her Majesty's government, the 

 undersigned is convinced, would not proceed in such a case to violent 

 measures of suppression without some understanding with the gov- 

 ernment of the United States, or, in the failure of an attempt to come 

 to an understanding, without due notice given of the course intended 

 to be pursued. 



"The undersigned need not urge upon Lord Aberdeen the desira- 

 bleness of an authoritative intervention on the part of her Majesty's 

 government to put an end to the proceedings complained of. The 

 President of the United States entertains a confident expectation of an 

 early and equitable adjustment of the difficulties which have been 

 now for so long a time under the consideration of her Majesty's govern- 

 ment. This expectation is the result of the President's reliance upon 

 the sense of justice of her Majesty's government, and of the fact that 

 from the year 1818, the date of the convention, until some years after 

 the attempts of the provincial authorities to restrict the rights of 

 American vessels by colonial legislation, a practical construction was 

 given to the first article of the convention, in accordance with the 

 obvious purport of its terms, and settling its meaning as understood 

 by the United States. 



"The undersigned avails himself of this opportunity to tender to 

 Lord Aberdeen the assurance of his distinguished consideration." 



Lord Aberdeen did not reply to Mr. Everett's letter until the 15th of 

 April, 1844. In his answer of that date, which follows, it will be 

 seen that his lordship declined to enter into a defence of the course 

 adopted by Nova Scotia; and that he confined himself to the seizure 

 of the Washington, and to an argument upon the term "bay" as used 

 in the convention. It will be seen, also, that he justified the detention 

 of the Washington on the ground, solely, that she "was found fishing 

 within the Bay of Fundy." He says: 



"The note which Mr. Everett, Envoy Extraordinan 7 and Minister 

 Plenipotentiary of the United States of America, addressed to the 

 undersigned, her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Foreign 

 Affairs, on the 10th of August last, respecting the seizure of the Ameri- 

 can fishing vessel Washington, by the officers of Nova Scotia, having 

 been duly referred to the Colonial Office, and by that office to the 

 governor of Nova Scotia, the undersigned has now the honor to com- 

 municate to Mr. Everett the result of those references. 



"The complaint which Mr. Everett submits to her Majesty's gov- 

 ernment is, that, contrary to the express stipulations of the conven- 

 tion concluded on the 20th of October, 1818, between Great Britain 

 and the United States, an American fishing vessel was seized by the 

 British authorities for fishing in the Bay of Fundy, where Mr. Everett 

 affirms that, by the treaty, American vessels have a right to fish, pro- 

 vided they are at a greater distance than three marine miles from the 

 coast. 



"Mr. Everett, in submitting this case, does not cite the words of the 

 treaty, but states, in general terms, that by the first article of said 

 treaty the United States renounce any liberty heretofore enjoyed or 

 claimed by their inhabitants, to take, dry, or cure fish, on or within 

 three miles of any of the coasts of any Majesty's dominions in America. 

 Upon reference, however, to the words of the treaty, it will be seen 



