a matter of reciprocal convenience and right, a means of preserving the fisheries at their highest point of production, and of conciliating a community of interest by a just proportion of advantages and profits.

Her Majesty's Government do not interpret these expressions in any sense derogatory to the sovereign authority of Great Britain in the territorial waters of Newfoundland, by which only regulations having the force of law within those waters can be made. So regarding the proposal, they are pleased not only to recognize in it an indication that the desire of Her Majesty's Government to arrive at a friendly and speedy settlement of this question is fully reciprocated by the Government of the United States, but also to discern in it the basis of a practical settlement of the difficulty; and I have the honour to request that you will inform Mr. Evarts that Her Majesty's Government, with a view to avoiding further discussion and future misunderstandings, are quite willing to confer with the Government of the United States respecting the establishment of regulations under which the subjects of both parties to the Treaty of Washington shall have the full and equal enjoyment of any fishery which under that Treaty is to be used in common. The duty of enacting and enforcing such regulations, when agreed upon, would, of course, rest with the Power having the sovereignty of the shore and waters in each case.

As regards the claim of the United States fishermen to compensation for the injuries and losses which they are alleged to have sustained in consequence of the violent obstruction which they encountered from British fishermen at Fortune Bay on the occasion referred to, I have to state that Her Majesty's Government are quite willing that they should be indemnified for any injuries and losses which upon a joint inquiry may be found to have been sustained by them, and in respect of which they are reasonably entitled to compensation; but on this point I have to observe that a claim is put forward by them for the loss of fish which had been caught, or which, but for the interference of the British fishermen, might have been caught by means of strand fishing, a mode of fishing to which, under the Treaty of Washington, they were not entitled to resort.

The prosecution by them of the strand fishery being clearly in excess of their Treaty privileges, Her Majesty's Government cannot doubt that, on further consideration, the United States Government will not be disposed to support a claim in respect of the loss of the fish which they had caught, or might have caught, by that process. I am, &c.

(Signed)

GRANVILLE.

No. 174.-1881, February 4: Letter from Mr. Evarts to Mr. Lowell.

No. 110

JAMES RUSSELL LOWELL, Esqre.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, February 4, 1881.

&c. &c. &c.

SIR: The communication from Her Britannic Majesty's Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Lord Granville, of October 27, 1880, respecting the disturbance which occurred at Fortune Bay on the

6th of January, 1878, was duly received in your despatch No. 81 of October 28, 1880.

As the separation of the questions raised by that occurrence and the method of their solution were general suggestions on the part of Her Britannic Majesty's Government, I had naturally supposed that this despatch would have been followed by such definite propositions as this Government could either accept or decline-the more so as I had (on June 12th, 1880), in reply to your telegraphic Report of a conversation with Lord Granville, authorized you to say that “the President will be quite ready to entertain any considerations which may be presented to the Secretary of State to relieve the question of the fisheries from its present difficulties."

If however, as circumstances would seem to indicate, I am to consider this communication as a preliminary inquiry from Lord Granville for the purpose of learning whether such suggestion would be so favourably received by this Government as to justify the opening of direct negotiations, it becomes my duty to put you in possession of the impressions which this inquiry has made upon the Government of the United States.

291

As I understand the purport of Lord Granville's communication, Her Britannic Majesty's Government desires to arrange the compensation due the United States fishermen for the disturbances at Fortune Bay, without the formal consideration or decision of any questions of Treaty construction which the facts of that disturbance might seem to raise, resting the right of compensation solely upon the unlawful violence exercised by British subjects in Newfoundland. The facts in this case are not complicated and the calculations are simple. The United States Government does not see in its present condition or character sufficient grounds to require any very elaborate method of decision such as a Commission or the necessity for any protracted inquiry. If Her Britannic Majesty's Government will propose the submission of the computation of damages to the summary award of the Secretary of State of the United States and Her Britannic Majesty's Representative at Washington (this function to be exercised either directly or by such delegation as may seem to them judicious), the Government of the United States will accept the proposition and close this controversy on the basis of that award.

But in signifying to Her Britannic Majesty's Government the willingness of the United States to accede to such a proposition, you will carefully guard against any admission of the correctness of those views of our Treaty rights which are expressed either explicity or by implication in Lord Granville's communication of October the 29th, 1880.

The views of this Government upon the proper construction of the rights of fishery guaranteed by the Treaty of Washington, have been fully expressed in my former despatches, and no reasons have been furnished to induce a change of opinion. The delay in the setttlement of the Fortune Bay case has been already too long protracted. It has provoked a not unnatural feeling of irritation among the fishermen of the United States at what they conceive to be a persistent denial of their Treaty rights, while it is to be feared that it has encouraged among the provincial fishermen the idea that their forci

ble resistance to the exercise of these rights is not without justification in their local law and the construction which Her Britannic Majesty's Government is supposed to have placed upon the provisions of the Treaty.

It is now three years since twenty-two vessels belonging to the United States and engaged in what by them and their Government was considered a lawful industry were forcibly driven from Fortune Bay under circumstances of great provocation and at very serious pecuniary loss. And this occurred at the very time when, under the award of the Halifax Commission, the Government of the United States were about paying to Her Britannic Majesty's Government a very large amount for the privilege of the exercise of this industry by these fishermen. In March of the same year, 1878, this very grave occurrence of January was brought to the attention of the British Government, in the confident hope that compensation would be promptly made for the losses caused by what the United States Government was willing to believe was a local misconstruction of the Treaty or a temporary and, from ignorance, perhaps an excusable popular excitement.

It is unnecessary to do more than recall to your attention the long and unsatisfactory discussion which followed the presentation of this claim, and especially the fact that in its progress the Government of the United States was compelled to express with emphatic distinctness the impossibility of accepting the subordination of its Treaty rights to the provisions of local legislation, which was apparently put forward by Her Majesty's Government as a sufficient ground for the rejection of the claim. And it was not until April, 1880 (a delay of two years, during which the importance of an early settlement was urged upon Her Majesty's Government), that, after what this Government understood and accepted at least as a satisfactory modification of the assumption, we were informed by Lord Salisbury that "Her Majesty's Government are of opinion that under the circumstances of the case as at present within their knowledge, the claim advanced by the United States fishermen for compensation on account of the losses stated to have been sustained by them on the occasion in question, is one which should not be entertained."

This decision of Her Majesty's Government terminated any further discussion, and the Government of the United States found itself compelled to protect the interests of its citizens by such methods as might commend themselves to its judgment. In addition to the Halifax Award which we had paid for the privileges and rights, the exercise of which is now denied our citizens, we were also continuously paying, in the shape of a remission of duties, some $300,000 per annum for this abortive right. Thus forced into position of antagonism which it profoundly regretted, the Government of the United States was about to take such action as would at least suspend this annual payment, until the two Governments were in accord upon the construction of the Treaty, when Her Majesty's Government, through the United States Minister in London, suggested, June 9, 1880, that the consideration of the subject be resumed between the two Governments, and that in such consideration, the two questions. of the interpretation of the Treaty and the attack upon the American fishermen be separated. To that suggestion I replied, June 12,

1880, communicating my great gratification at the friendly disposition of the British Cabinet, and saying that," the President would be quite ready to entertain any consideration which may be presented to the Secretary of State to relieve the question of the fisheries from its present difficulties."

On Ocober 27, 1880, Lord Granville addressed you the communication which is the subject of this despatch. I regret to find in this communication a disposition to restrict a liberal compensation for an acknowledged wrong by limitations of the fishing rights accorded by the Treaty to which this Government cannot consent. The use of the strand, not as a basis of independent fishing, but as auxiliary to the use of the seine in these waters where seine-fishing is the only possible mode of taking herring, has been maintained by this Government in my former despatches, and would seem to be justified by the explicit declaration of Her Majesty's Government in the submitted by them to the Halifax Commission, in which, referring to the use of the shores, it is affirmed "without such permission the

66

case

practical use of the inshore fisheries was impossible." But as 292 Lord Granville distinctly refers the propriety and justice of

these limitations to further negotiations I will not now discuss them, reserving what I deem it right to say for a future despatch in reference to the second of his Lordship's suggestions.

I have recalled to your attention the history of the Fortune Bay outrage, in order that you may express to Her Britannic Majesty's Government the great disappointment which this long delay in its settlement has occasioned. The circumstances under which it occurred were such as to induce this Government to anticipate prompt satisfaction, and it is impossible not to feel that the course which the British Government has thought fit to pursue has seriously affected public opinion as to the worth of the Treaty which it was hoped by both countries had promoted an amicable solution of longstanding difficulties.

The United States Government cannot feel that justice has been done its citizens in the protracted discussion which this occurrence has provoked, and while perfectly willing to endeavour in concert with Her Britannic Majesty's Government to find some practical and friendly solution of the differences of construction as to the Treaty provisions which their application seems to have developed, this Government cannot consent that, pending such discussion, its citizens shall be exposed to the indignity and loss which have been imposed upon them by these and like occurrences.

You will intimate courteously but firmly to Lord Granville that in accepting what we understand to be the proposition of Mer Majesty's Government it is understood as carrying the idea that the settlement suggested will be put in course of immediate execution, and that the determination of the amount of compensation will not be formally confined by any limitation arising from any construction of the Treaty which may be matter of difference between the two Govern

ments.

So useful to the great interests involved do I regard the prompt settlement of this incident in our fishery relations, that I would be glad to hear by telegraph that Lord Granville concurs in the simple form of award which I have proposed.

In imparting to the British Government these views, you may in your discretion read this despatch to Lord Granville and, if he desires it, leave him a copy.

I am, sir, your obedient servant

(Signed)

WM. M. EVARTS.

No. 175.-1881, February 26: Letter from Earl Granville to the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury.

FOREIGN OFFICE, February 26, 1881. MY LORDS, Your Lordships are aware that a correspondence has taken place with the Government of the United States with regard to certain claims of American fishermen on account of the interruption of their fishing on the coasts of Newfoundland, amounting to about 120,000 dollars, including interest.

The Government of the United States suggested that these claims should be referred for assessment to the United States' Secretary of State and Her Majesty's Minister at Washington, or to delegates named by them, but it appeared to Her Majesty's Government that it was, for many reasons, desirable to avoid so dilatory a process of investigation, and I was accordingly authorized by the Cabinet to offer a sum of 15,000 or 75,000 dollars, in full settlement of the claims.

The United States' Minister has informed me to-day that this offer is accepted, and I have stated to him in reply that Her Majesty's Government are ready to hold this sum of 15,000 at the disposal of the Government of the United States on receiving his assurance that it is accepted in full of all claims arising out of any interruption of American fishermen on the coasts of Newfoundland and its depend. encies up to the present time, and without prejudice to any question of the rights of either Government under the Treaty of Washington. I have now therefore to request that your Lordships will be good enough to give the necessary directions for this amount to be held in readiness.

I have forwarded a copy of this letter to Her Majesty's Secretary of State for the Colonies, with whom it will rest to make application to the Governor of Newfoundland for the ultimate refund of this payment.

I am, &c.,

(Signed)

GRANVILLE.

No. 176.-1881, March 2: Letter from Mr. Lowell to Earl Granville.

LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES,

London, March 2nd, 1881.

MY LORD, I have the honour to acquaint your Lordship that, having inquired of Mr. Evarts by telegraph of the nature of the as

surance that I might give your Lordship upon the receipt of 293 the proposed indemnity in the Newfoundland fishery transactions, I received from him an answer by cable late last evening to the following effect:

The assurance I may give is this: that the sum paid is accepted in full of all claims arising out of any interruption of American