INTRODUCTION xxxi 



within the land. It is a fact that the British negotiators preferred the 

 use of the word "liberty" to "right" in the second sentence of the article, 

 but the reason advanced for such preference was not due to any differ- 

 ence of meaning in the two terms, but because the word "liberty" would 

 be more palatable to the British public than the word "right" in such 

 a connection. The American Commissioners were not tmwilling to 

 gratify the British negotiators in the matter of form provided that the 

 substance was unaffected. To quote John Adams: 



"They said it" (the use of the word "liberty") "amounted to the 

 same thing, for liberty was right and privilege was right; but the 

 word right might be more unpleasing to the people of England than 

 liberty and we did not think it necessary to contend for a word."' 



From this brief summary and analysis of the provisions of the article 

 and the reasons advanced for the form in which it is couched, it is appar- 

 ent that the Treaty of 1783 was a recognition and a solemn confirmation 

 by treaty of the antecedent right of the people of the United States, as 

 the successors of the colonists, to fish not only upon high seas over which 

 Great Britain claimed a right to exclude foreigners, and within the 

 territorial waters of Great Britain, but also within definite limits and 

 upon certain conditions to dry and cure fish upon certain portions of 

 British territory mentioned in the article. 



The Convention of 1818 



So matters stood at the conclusion of the American Revolution and 

 the recognition of the independence of the United States by Great 

 Britain. And so the rights of American fishermen in British waters and 

 upon British territory would have continued to stand had it not been 

 for the unfortunate War of 181 2, which settled little and unsettled much. 

 The treaty of peace as far as the fisheries were concerned was eminently 

 satisfactory, so satisfactory indeed that controversies between the two 

 countries respecting them do not seem to have arisen from 1783 

 to 181 2, and they are therefore unmentioned either in Jay's Treaty of 

 1794 or in the Pinkney Treaty of 1806 between the two countries, 

 which failed of ratification. It may well be that the treaty would in the 

 course of time have required interpretation and have given rise to serious 

 controversies, because the growth of the British colonies to the north 

 of the United States would have brought into operation the condition 

 specified in the second sentence of the third article, and also because the 

 question whether the American fishermen were to be subject to local 

 regulations of a discriminatory nature in the exercise of their treaty 



•U. S. Case, p. 31; Appendix, U. S. Case, Vol. I, p. 318. 



