QUESTION ONE. 45 



view that the fishery in its entirety as conceded by the treaty of 

 1783 was of a character and held on a tenure which made it enduring 

 and not subject to the vicissitudes of war. They were furnished 

 with all that had been said and written on the subject, and, while 

 authorized to accept a less extent of coast than that provided in 

 the former treaty, were expected to secure whatever extent of fishing 

 might be agreed upon in terms which would conform to the American 

 contention as to the former right. 



Their guiding star was the following declaration of Mr. Adams 

 contained in his letter of September 25, 1815, to Lord Bathurst: 



Upon this foundation, my lord, the Government of the United 

 States consider the people thereof as wholly entitled of right to all the 

 liberties in the North American fisheries which have always belonged 

 to them ; which, in the treaty of 1783, were, by Great Britain, recog- 

 nized as belonging to them ; and which they never have, by any act of 

 theirs, consented to renounce. With these views, should Grenat Brit- 

 ain ultimately determine to deprive them of the enjoyment of these lib- 

 erties by force, it is not for me to say whether, or for what length of 

 time, they would submit to the bereavement of that which they would 

 still hold to be their unquestionable right. It is my duty to hope that 

 such measures will not be deemed necessary to be resorted to on the 

 part of Great Britain ; and to state that if they should, they can not 

 impair the right of the people of the United States to the liberties in 

 question, so long as no formal and express assent of theirs shall mani- 

 fest their acquiescence in the privation.* 



The first draft proposal concerning the fisheries came from the 

 American negotiators and was presented by them at the third con- 

 ference and there was little variance between that draft and the 

 article finally agreed on, either in substantial terms or in phraseology. 



The draft was accompanied by the explanatory memorandum he- 

 fore mentioned, which was never neutralized by a contrary British 

 memorandum. 



The language of the American draft, it will be remembered, in 

 the words employed to describe the character of the estate and to 

 secure the fixity of its tenure was, " It is agreed that the inhabitants 

 of the United States shall continue to enjoy unmolested forever the 

 liberty to take fish," etc. 



The British counter project, in its words of estate and tenure, was: 

 "It is agreed that the inhabitants of the United States shall have 

 liberty to take fish," etc. 



The words of the article finally agreed on wore: "It is agreed 

 that the inhabitants of the United States shall have forever, in com- 



*U. S. Case, Appendix, 272. 



