INTRODUCTION xix 



" Counter-Declaration ■ 



"The principles which have guided the King, in the whole course of the negotia- 

 tions which preceded the re-establishment of peace, must have convinced the King 

 of Great Britain, that His Majesty has had no other design than to render it solid and 

 lasting, by preventing, as much as possible, in the four quarters of the world, every 

 subject of discussion and quarrel. The King of Great Britain undoubtedly places too 

 much confidence in the uprightness of His Majesty's intentions, not to rely upon his 

 constant attention to prevent the Islands of St. Pierre and Miquelon from becoming 

 an object of jealousy between the two nations. 



"As to the fishery on the coasts of Newfoundland, which has been the object of 

 the new arrangements settled by the two sovereigns upon this matter, it is sufficiently 

 ascertained by the fifth article of the treaty of peace signed this day, and by the dec- 

 laration likewise delivered to-day, by His Britannic Majesty's Ambassador Extraor- 

 dinary and Plenipotentiary; and His Majesty declares, that he is fully satisfied on 

 this head. 



" In regard to the fishery between the Island of Newfoundland and those of St. 

 Pierre and Miquelon, it is not to be carried on, by either party, but to the middle of 

 the channel; and His Majesty will give the most positive orders, that the French fish- 

 ermen shall not go beyond this line. His Majesty is firmly persuaded that the King 

 of Great Britain will give lilte orders to the English fishermen."' 



It is obvious that the Declaration in itself confers no new rights upon 

 French fishermen, although these rights are clearly defined and stated. 

 It may be said to create additional duties on the part of Great Britain, 

 for Great Britain assumes specifically obligations which however good 

 faith in the observance of treaty stipulations would have suggested 

 or required. The purpose was not to secure to French citizens 

 greater rights than they previously possessed, but to assure to them 

 the exercise of those rights which had been conferred and acknowl- 

 edged by the Treaty of Utrecht, for "the thirteenth article of the 

 treaty of Utrecht, and the method of carr}dng on the fisheries which 

 has at all times been acknowledged, shall be the plan upon which the 

 fishery shall be carried on there; it shall not be deviated from by 

 either party." The origin and nature of the rights are thus determined 

 by the Treaty of Utrecht. The limits within which the rights shall 

 be exercised were modified and defined by Article V of the Treaty of 

 1783, to which the Declaration imder consideration was attached. 

 The Declaration, as its name implies, is not a creation of a right, 

 but a solemn statement of its existence, and is to be considered 

 as a modus operandi or as a modus vivendi. Its purpose is to secure 

 peaceful enjoyment of the rights granted by the Treaty of Utrecht, 

 as modified by the Treaty of 1783, and to give "all possible eflScacy 

 to the principles which shall prevent even the least foundation of dis- 

 pute for the future," and to put an end to the "daily quarrels" which 



^Appendix, p. 377; Appendix, U. S. Case, p. 56; Appendix, British Case, p. 12. 



