208 
Indiana University 
possibly the desire indicated by the petition, together with 
the troubles in the Red River settlement and the strong op- 
position of the maritime provinces against the confedera- 
tion, might cause the British government “to consider whether 
the time was not near when the future relation of the colonies 
to Great Britain must be contemplated with reference to these 
manifestations ... of dissatisfaction with their present 
condition’’. 
In instructions to Motley, the American minister in Eng- 
land, after referring to the practical arguments in favor of 
the independence of British American colonies. Fish wrote: 
You will exercise your discretion . . . availing yourself of every 
opportunity to obtain information as to the real sentiments of the British 
government on the question of the separation of the colonies from the 
mother country and, w'hen opportunity offers, indicating the facts which 
seem to make such separation a necessity.’^ 
In March, 1870, on the eve of the Franco-Prussian War, 
Fish again urged that the American provinces were a menace 
of danger to Great Britain and that their independence would 
remove the cause of irritation and possible complication which 
existed especially in times of Fenian activity. Thornton con- 
sidering the contingencies of possible European wars in 
which England might be involved replied that altho Great 
Britain could not inaugurate a separation she was “willing 
and even desirous to have one”. 
Altho Fish had gradually drifted from Sumner’s policy and 
never again urged withdrawal,^^ he had occasion to refer to 
the subject in subsequent conversations with Thornton. In 
September, 1870, on the day that the German army invested 
Paris, he intimated to Thornton that the independence of 
Canada was the proper solution of the fishery disputes. 
Thornton, after repeating what he had said before, signifi- 
cantly added: 
It is impossible to connect the question of Canadian independence 
with the Alabama claims — not even to the extent of providing for the 
■5 22 Instructions to Great Britain, 163, January 14, 1870. 
Grant’s administration doubtless would have prevented the seizure of Canada by 
any European power. In his message of May 31, 1870, urging- the acquisition of San 
Domingo, he considered it proper to assert a corollary of the Monroe Doctrine which he 
declared was as important as the original doctrine: “That hereafter no territory on this 
continent shall be regarded as subject to transfer to an European power.’’ 
On May 19, 1870, Senator Pomeroy offered a resolution requesting- the President 
if expedient to open negotiations with Great Britain in order to ascertain whether the 
union of the British North American provinces with the United States could be accom- 
plished upon terms equally advantageous and honorable to Great Britain, the British 
provinces, and the United States. (Senate Miscellaneous Documents, No. 140, 41-2.) 
