110 ARGUMENT OF GREAT BRITAIN. 



attempt to urge that Chaleur was of that description, and did. not 

 himself enter the bay." 



Commander Campbell appears to have been present at the conver- 

 sation of 1852, to which the Vice- Admiral referred, and in a report 

 of 26th August, 1852, he recounted a subsequent one in this way 

 (British Case, App., p. 195) : 



" Commodore Perry in alluding to the fisheries told me, that he 

 was fully aware that the United States fishermen frequently violated 

 the Treaty, and pointed out what he considered the limits in nearly 

 the same words, as he used while speaking to you in my presence on 

 board the ' Cumberland.'' I did not enter upon the subject with him 

 more than I could help, but on his asking me, what I considered the 

 sea boundary of the Bay of Chaleur, I told him that I thought from 

 Miscon Point, to Point Macqueron, but that I was merely giving my 

 private opinion. 



" The Commodore then told me that all the fishermen he had seen 

 complained more of the exclusion from Chaleur Bay, than any other 

 part of the Gulf, but that he told them distinctly they could not fish 

 in that bay without clearly violating the Treaty and that they must 

 take the consequences if they attempted it." 



The action of Mr. Webster was the subject of debates in Congress, 

 and some of the speeches are material as showing the real cause of the 

 difficulty. The speakers pointed out that the fisheries had changed 

 since 1818, and that the mackerel fishery, an inshore fishery, which 

 was then of no account, had since become important. Representative 

 Tuck, for example, said : 



" From the first of September to the close of the season, the mack- 

 erel run near the shore, and it is next to impossible for our vessels to 

 obtain fares without taking fish within the prohibited limits. We 

 differ with England in regard to the measurement of these ' limits,' 

 they claiming to run from ' headland to headland ' and we to follow 

 the indentations of the coast. But the real difficulty is not here. 

 ******* 



" I do not think it generally known that the whole difficulty about 

 the fisheries is about our right to take mackerel. The cod fishing 

 privileges are adequate already; and no vessel in that business has 

 ever been seized or interfered with. I think it is proper to go still 

 further, and to state frankly what, after a patient investigation of 

 every source of authentic information within my reach, I believe to 



be the real difficulty. 

 125 " The real truth is, our fishermen need absolutely, and must 



have, the thousands of miles of shore fishery which have been 

 renounced, or they must always do an uncertain business. If our 

 mackerel men are prohibited from going within three miles of the 

 shore, and are forcibly kept away, (and nothing but force will do 

 it), then they may .as well give up their business first as last. It will 

 be always uncertain, and generally unsuccessful, however well pur- 

 sued. 



