250 



address you fVnm Oiis sidi; of the ta1)le. Tliere was no Minis'or ot Marine, witli 100 fine 

 fog-\\]iistles a( liis comniiind, ready to blow a blast of triiitaph all alonj;- (lie eoast upon 

 the reeeipt of this award, 'i'here were no rights to invade, and the .Maritime Provinces 

 and the Dominion eaine into existenee, subjcet to the eoiiditions of national life which 

 that Treaty created. When they did conic into the.se wattjrs they found ns then". 



Our rijilits, and the character of our rights, under the Treaty of 178:5, were never 

 questioned or disjiuted for over a (|iiarter of a century, not until the war of 1812, and 

 then tilt" rineslioii was made only as an cH'ort of dinjomatic Juirv.sc. Thr 'J'reaty of 17B3 

 had given to Uritisli sidijeets the right of navigat."or, on the Mi.^jsissippi River, und(>r the 

 lielii't' tliat tlie boundary line between the two countries touejied tlie sources of tiiat river. 

 By ISlt ii was discovered that this was not so ; and. as the right to use the territory of 

 the United Stales to reacli tlie river had not been given, tlie riiilit to use the i'iv<-r was 

 not availalile. Then was invented tlie llieory that the warof 1M2 abrogated the Treaty 

 of 178'5, and by it the Rrilisli Ciovernment were enabled to propose to renew tlie Fishery 

 Articles, if we would remodel and make cflective the Article as to the Mississippi. We 

 denied the lhe<iry. I will not, of couise, trouble you with any detailed aeeounl of the 

 negdliatioiis ; tlie eorres}iondence between Mr. Adams and Lord Lathur.st, and the 

 negotiations of the Treaty of Ghent, are matters of familiar history. 



The (jiieslion liius rai.-;ed was left unsettled, both Ciovernments maintaining their 

 po.silions until the C'onventhm of 18'-:. Two things are evident from that Convenl ion. 

 First, that our right, ns we maintained it, to the inshore lisheries, was recognized, 

 because Cireat Jb'itain accepted t'roni us tlie reliiuiuishment of a jiortioii of it. and by 

 accept ing- wjiat we gave, rccogni/.ed our right to gixf. Second, that we reliii(|uished 

 this riglil because our fishing was at that time entirely a deep-sea fishing, and because 

 the seltiemeiit of tlu' coasts of the ^Maritime Provinces, and the develoiiiuent of local 

 Colonial tisliinies anticipated i'.i the Treaty ot' 1783 were now being realix.ed. T'hat 

 Convention was a trie lully and liberal concession on the part of the I'nitid Slates, and 

 v\hen we are reipiired to-day to pa\ for tlie restoration of the former condition, w(; arc 

 simjilN made to pay tor our own liberality. For what are (he Treaties of ]biJ-i and 1«71 

 but a restoration of (lie conditions of the Treaty of 1783, accompanied by that freer 

 coiiiiiu reial intercourse which the interests and the intelligeiiee of butli countries 

 demand ? 



I had ])rop().sed to (race tl 



\c ncii-o 



iaiions from 181S to ISoI.aiid theiiee to tli 



ic 



l^roloeol and 'iVeaty of 1871. liiu these latter were soiiiewliat fully discussed in tl 

 argument uimn the motion formerly made; on Ix half of the I'liiled Stale.-*, ami my 

 fii:l\ e\)ilaiiii'd to you how, and by what ageiu'ies, the n slrictions ol' the 



col 



eauue 



a; 



C 



onv( iitioii of ISJS heeai 



I 



lie 



me so odious (o our iieo])le. 

 d not do eiore tlian refer von lo the iiislruciions of tlu' I'rilisli (iovcnureut to 



lie remmalor; 



of ihe Tl 



eat\ o 



r Wasliiiigion. ami reeogiii/,i\ as 1 do ino.~-l uladU', the 



wisiloiu aiid liberality of llieir spirit, and 1 now turn to the praetieal (juestioii wliieli that 



Treat \ suhniits to \()ur decismii 



1 



coi.ie now to the (jueslioi: 



that Treat\ of 1871 rai 



SI'S, 



am 



1 ll 



ie\ are Sim 



. , - . . . !''>■ 



tliese: what is the dilli reiiee in value uiiiiied by us. and (he advantages g;iiued by you — 



that i> 111 ^ay, what is the dillereiiee in value between the right to tisli williiu the lliree- 

 iiiile liiiiil. Oil one side, and the ri^hl to lisli on the I'niled States' shores on llie other, 

 coupled uilli llie right lo .send lish and (i.s!i-oil lo the L'nited Staus' market tree of 

 dul_\ ? 



With reuar<l lo the lislieries : the lislievies with whii'h the Treat v of 1871 is con 



cerneii 



are 



ll 



le cod, the herrinu-. the mackerel, the hake, the hadiloek, ;iiul haliiml 



lislierie.-. within the ihree-mile limit. I'or the purposes of this argument there will be, 

 cuu lit that we can dismiss the li;ike.li;iddock, and halibut lisheries. 



Ill 



iiiil 



It 



;eiii-ral ayrt 

 .1 



is ailmiit'd. also, that the cod lisherv is essentially a deep-sea fishery, and does not, 



iherefore, eunie wiihin tiie .'•eope of viair e.vaminalion. (spi'cially as the (piestioii of bait 

 One connected il with tins discussion, has Iji en eliminated b\ \oar 



and 



Sllp[:lles, WllK 



rormer (leeision. 



We have left, llien. oiiK llie h 



slierv and the macUerel iisherv. A.s to tl 



ic 



heriiii"' li>lii'r\, 1 sh;ill sa\ hiil \ci'v few words, 'J'he herriii"' (islicrv on the sli 



iCthe 



M:iL;da!e'i Islands, we claim of right — a few scattering catches elsewhere are not 

 apprecialiie eiioii'^ili lo talk about ; and we have, tlicrciore, only the herring lisheries of 

 Kewfouiulland and (irand .Manaii. The liirmer is c.sseiiliall\ a bo/.en herring husiness, 

 and I do not believe there exists a ipiestion that this business, hoth at Ni'wtiamdiand 

 and (irand Maiian, iseulircK a mercantile business, a cinmiercial transaction, a biiving 



d sellinu'. not a lishiie. 



Tl 



Jr. liulison, 



11' testiiiioin (111 this siibji et is com|ileli 



ind is conlirmed 



the (.'olleclor of the Port of Cjlloucester, who has told vou thiit the 



