269 



rospectpblc and necossavv maintonanco ; hut it rcvfvf d, also, the collisions between the 

 Provinces and the Crown ; ami when tlie Provineal Governments nndertook to lay down 

 a ten niih' line, and say to the cutters, "Seize any American vessel found within three 

 miles of a line drawn from iieadland to headland, ten miles apart," sucii alarm did it 

 cause in (in at Britain, lliat the Secretary of State did not write, but telegraplied 

 instantly to the Provinces that no such tliin"; could be permitted, and tlial they could 

 carry it no fuulier than the bi\-mile rule. Then attempts were made to sell licenses. 

 Great Britain said : "Do not annoy these Americans; we arc doing a very disagreeable 

 thin?: ; ^ve are trying to exclude them from an uncertain three mih; line ; wc would 

 rather give up all the fish in llie ocean than have anything to do with it ; but you insist 

 upon it ; "do not annoy these Americans ; give tliem a license — just for a nominal fee." 

 So they charged a nominal fee, as I have said, of fifty cents a Ion, which was afterwards 

 raised — lliey know why, wc do not — to a dollar. We paid the fifty cent fee, and some 

 Anu'ricans paid the dollar fee — and why ? They iiave told you why. Not because they 

 thouglit the right to fish within three miles was wortli that sum. but it was worth that sum 

 to escape the dangers and annoyances which beset them, whether they were innocent or 

 guilty, under the law. Then at last, the Provinces, as if determined that there should be 

 no peace on lliat sub)ect,unlil we were driven out of the fisheries, raised it to an impossible 

 sum — two dollars a ton. and we would not pay it. What led them to raise it? What 

 motive could there have been ? They lost by it. Our vessels did not pay it. Why, this 

 was the result — I do not sayit was the motive— that it left our fishermen unprotected, and 

 brouglit out t' 'ii- cutters and crusiers, and tiiat whole tribe of harpies that line the coast, 

 like so many wreekmen, ready to seize upon any vessel, and take it into port and divide 

 pliuidiM". It lift us a prey to them and unprotected. It also revived tlie duties, for 

 we, of course, i(:;!i)red the duty of two dollars a barrel on the mackerel, and one dollar 

 a barrel on t lie herring, it caused their best fishermen to return into tiie employment 

 of the United Slates, and tlieir boat-fisliing fell otF. That has been stated to your 

 Honours before, but it cannot be too constantly borne in mind. We restored tlu^ duties, 

 and that broke up tin; vessel-lishing of the Provinces, it deprived them of tlu'ir best 

 men ; it caused trouble between tlie old countiy and the provinces; it put us all on tlie 

 trembling edge of possible international conflict. But we went on as well we could in 

 that stale of things, until (ireat Britain, desirous of relieving herself from that burden, 

 and the United States desiring to be released from those perils, and having also another 

 great question luisettled, tiiat is, the consequences of the captures by the "Alabama," 

 the two countries met togetlier with High Commissioners, at Wasliington, in 1871, and 

 then made a great Treaty of Peace. 1 call it a " Treaty of Peace," because it was a 

 Treaty wliieh precluded war, not restored peace after war, but prevented war, upon 

 terms most honourable to botli parties; and as one portion of lliat Treal\ — one that, 

 though not the most important by any nu'ans, nor filling so large a place in tlie public 

 eye, as did llie Congress at (jeueva, \et fills an important place in history, and its 

 conseciuenccs to the people of both countries, was the determination of this vex'ed and 

 perpetual question of the rights of fishing in tlie bays of the nortliwestern Atlantic; 

 and by that Treaty, we went back again to llic old condition in which we liad been 

 from 1620 down, with rhe exception of the period between 1818 and 1851, and the 

 period between 186G ai\d 1S7I. Tiiat restored both sides to the only condition in which 

 there can he peace and security; peace of mind, at least, freedom from apprehension, 

 between the two Governments. And when those terms were made, whicli were terms 

 of peace, of good-will to men, of security for the future, and of permanent basis always, 

 and W(! agreed to free trade nuitually in fish and fish oil, and free rights of fishing, 

 as theretofore almost always held. Great Britain said, '•Very well; but there should be 

 paid to us a money comjiensaliou." The United States asked none ; perhaps it did not 

 think it a fitting thing to do. Great Britain said, "This is all very well; but there 

 should be a compensation in money, because we ar(> infornu'd by the I'rovinces" — 1 do 

 not believe that Great Britain cared anything about it herself — "that it is of more 

 );ecuniary value to the Ami'ricans to have the right of fishing extended over that region 

 fri.m which they have b(>eii lately excluded, than it is to us to have secured to us free 

 riglit to sell all over the United Stales the calciiings of Her Majesty's subjects, free from 

 any duty that the Americans might possibly put u[)on us." " Very well," said tiiu United 

 States, " if thai is your view of it, if you really think you ought to have a money compen- 

 sation we will agree to submit it to a tribunal." .\nd to this tribunal it is submitted — 

 First, under Article XVlll of the Tnjaty of 1871, what is the money value of what the 

 United Slates obtains under that article ? Next, what is the money value of what Great 

 Britain obtains under Articles XXI and XIX ? Second, is what the United States obtains 

 under Article XVI II of more pecuniary value than what Great Britain obtains under 

 1 280] ' 2 O 



