I 



396 



statement, which is filed hero in Appemiix (O), I find thnt for 1872 and 1873 he 

 nbsohitciy swmirs tiiiit no tiips wciv inatU" to the hiiy (hiring these two seasons, and that 

 no niiK kcrel wore cau,L;lit there at all hy him. How do you think that this gentleman 

 would ligiire if lie was hroir^lit up here nnd put to thu test of eross-exmninution on thut 

 stand ? 



lakinu; tiic next stuteinent. C.C., the statement of Willioni S. Wonson — the corre- 

 spondinj; alKdavil is (14. lie states that the firm of Wonson and Company " since the 

 Washiniiton Treaty, so eidled, lui'^ l)een in c (I'eet, iiave employed their vessels as follows." 



In 1872 they made two (rips to the l)ay and eaui;ht •l.'iO harrelsol mackerel according 

 to alliduvit No. ()4, wiiile in I''?-, aeeordinj; t() thi'* last statement, not a sinj^le trip was 

 made to tlie liay hy any of their ve-sels, as you see. In I M73, they say that two trips 

 were made, wlien they gat 400 barrels; wiiile in 1873, according to the last statement, 

 they eauijht in the May of St. fiawreuce 1)'J3 barrels. In 1874, accordin;; to afHdavit 

 No. (i4, 32.") barrels, ai\d according to Appendix (O), 88.') barrels. In 1875 they swear 

 in their (irst alHdavit they made two trips to the bay, and got 300 barrels ; and in 1875, 

 they decUui' in this last statement, that they made but one tri|» and caught I iiO barrels. 

 In lS7tJ they made one trip to the bay, as they swear in their first allidavit, and caught 

 150 barrels of mackerel, while in this last statement they say that they got none at all in 

 the bay in 1870. 



I think I might go on if I chose, but it seems to be running them almost to the death 

 to follow up this subject. These are affidavits obtained from persons whom they took 

 care not to bring here to be examined. 



Tlicrc is another matter to which I wish to call your attention, in connection with 

 these aflidavits, to show how peculiarly they have been prepared. I do not at all seek to 

 quarrel with the decision which was given by this Commission some time in September 

 last, by which you exclude from the consideration of the Court the question of the value 

 of the privilege which the Americans enjoyed, of buying bait and ice, and of transshipping 

 cargoes. It was contended with great force by my learned friends on tlie other side that 

 those privileges did not fall within the provisions of this Treaty ; and 1 contended on 

 behalf of Her Majesty's Government, that at all events in the view of that Government 

 they did fall within the provisions of this Treaty ; but of course if the American Govern- 

 ment put a different construction upon it, and accepted the exercise of these rights at 

 merely our will and pleasure, I thought that the consequences would be worse to them 

 than to us. Your Excellency and your Honours adopted the view of the American 

 Government on this point and ruled that those privileges did not fall within the province 

 of this Treaty. As a matter of interest, now, perhaps, only historic because I do not ask 

 you to reverse your decision on that subject I wish to call your attention to the fact 

 that the United Slates at one time held a very different opinion from that which was here 

 put forward by my learned friend Judge Foster, and bis able coadjutors. If you look at 

 question No. 29 in all these aHiduvits, you will observe a peculiar fact — a great number 

 of tliese affidavits are prepared by rpiestion and answer, and they were taken a number of 

 years ago, for some of them are dated as far back as 1873 and 1872, and possibly 

 previously. 



Mr. Foster. — Those were taken in reply to a series of questions propounded by the 

 Treasury Department. 



Mr. Thomson. — Now, the Treasury Department is a governmental department of the 

 United States ; and this question No. 29 is repeated in each affidavit. Wherever in these 

 affidavits you find that nuniber, you find the same question, although you will find divers 

 answers given to it. The question is as follows :— 



" Do American fishermen gain, under the Treaty of Washington, any valuable rights of landing to 

 dry nets and cure fish, or to repack them, or to trausship cargoes which were not theirs before ? if so, 

 what are those rights, and what do you estimate them to bo worth annually in the aggregate ' " 



And the answer of this particular witness in the first affidavit is :— 

 " I do not know how valuable the privilege granted by the Treaty of Washinp^^on may prove." 



That is the question which is put throughout, and I say that this is the best evidence 

 you can have in support of the view that the United States entertained at the time when 

 these questions were framed ; a very different opinion from that which they entertain now 

 with reference to the privileges which they obtained under this Treaty. 



I made in an earlier portion of my address some remarks with respect to the little 

 value that is to be attached to affidavits as a rule ; and I think thut I have exemplified the 

 validity of my contention tolerably well. 



I 



