68 "I am also in possession of the affidavit of Alex. T. Vachem, master of the American fishing schooner "Mascotte," who entered Port Amherst, Magdalen Islands, and was there threatened by the Customs official with seizure of his vessel, if he attempted to obtain bait for fishing or take a pilot.' "And from a Report of the Customs officer at Magdalen Islands, a copy of which, so far as it relates to the case in point, is hereto annexed, it appears that no grounds exist for the complaint made by the master of the Mascotte.' "The Minister states that Captain Vachem was served with a printed copy of the warning,' and was, in addition, informed by the Collector that under the treaty of 1818 he had no right to buy bait or to ship men. He was not forbidden to take fish, but, on the contrary, the Collector pointed out to him on the chart the places in which, by the convention of 1818, he, as a United States fisherman, had the right to inshore fishing, and one of the places so pointed out to him was the Magdalen Islands. "Notwithstanding the 'warning' and the personal explanation of the Collector, it appears that Captain Vachem did go up the country and attempt to hire men, and upon his return informed the Collector that he could not get any. For this, clearly an illegal act he was not interefered with by the Collector. "The Minister further observes that the convention of 1818, while it grants to United States fishermen the right of fishing in common with British subjects on the shores of the Magdalen Islands, does not confer upon them privileges of trading or of shipping men, and it was against possible acts of the latter kind, and not against fishing inshore, or seeking the rights of hospitality guaranteed under the treaty, that Captain Vachem was warned by the Collector." When, therefore, Lord Iddesleigh wrote the letter to Mr. Phelps of the 30th November, 1886, above referred to, he had in mind that he had, a few days before, instructed the British Ambassador at Washington to communicate the position taken by Canada, on the question of purchase of bait, as shown by the Order in Council. Under these circumstances, it is quite impossible to construe his letter of the 30th November, 1886, as an acknowledgment that, in his opinion, American fishermen were entitled to purchase bait under the treaty of 1818. Indeed, the language of other parts of his letter indicates that he was endeavouring to ascertain what the United States contention was, rather than admitting that its contention was correct. And Mr. Phelps' reply of the 26th January, 1887, indicates that he so understood Lord Iddesleigh. He said: 69 "In view of the very grave questions that exists as to the extent of those rights, in respect to which the views of the United States Government differ so widely from those insisted upon by Her Majesty's Government, it does not seem to me an unreasonable proposal that the two Governments, by a temporary and mutual concession, without prejudice, should endeavour to reach some middle ground of ad interim construction, by which existing friendly relations might be preserved, until some permanent Treaty arrangements could be made (British Case, App., p. 400)." INHIBITION OF COLONIAL LEGISLATION. The United States refers to the correspondence relating to the "Thomas F. Bayard" and the "Mascotte" for the further purpose of establishing that a British Colonial Secretary at one time (3rd August, 1863) intimated, to the Government of New Foundland, that local legislation, prohibitory of the sale of bait, would not be sanctioned. But there is nothing to show that the Colonial Secretarys reason for so intimating had the slightest connection with the treaty liberties. In 1863, the reciprocity treaty of 1854 was in force; and the Colonial Secretary's letter cannot be held to be indicative of the policy of the Colonial Office under other conditions. Indeed, after the expiration of the treaty, such legislation was sanctioned (United States Case, App., p. 806). NORTH ATLANTIC COAST FISHERIES APPENDIX TO THE COUNTER-CASE PRESENTED ON THE PART OF THE GOVERNMENT OF HIS TO THE TRIBUNAL CONSTITUTED UNDER AN AGREEMENT SIGNED AT WASHINGTON ON THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY, 1909, BETWEEN HIS BRITANNIC MAJESTY AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA I No. 1 1778, February 6.. 21778, February 6.... 3 1909, January 9.............. Date. 1782, April 28. 1782. April 28. 1782. May 1 (circa]. 1782, May 4. 1782, May 6.. 1782, May 14. 25 1782, May 18. 1776, July 4. 1776, December 30... 1778, July 9.. 1779.. 1780, October 17.. 36 28 1782. May 23. 1782 May 26. 30 1782. June 3. 31 1782, June 4. PART II.-Documents bearing on the Treaty of 1783. 1782. May 18. 1782, May 18. 32 1782. June 5... 1782, June 5. 33 34 1782. June 9. 1782. June 10. 1782. June 10. 1782. June 13. 1782, June 15. 1782, June 15 21. TABLE OF CONTENTS.* 40 1782. June 17.. 41 1782. June 26. 42 1782, June 26-30.. PART I.-Treaties. Description. Treaty of Alliance between the United States of America and France. Treaty between the United States of America and the Republic of United States: Articles of Confederation. United States: Journals of the Continental Congress. (Extracts).... United States: Resolution of Congress in reference to terms of peace. United States: Resolution of Congress revoking Mr. Adams' Com Digby, in America. (Extract.) Letter: Mr Oswald to Lord Shelburne. (Extract). Page. (Extract).. Letter: Mr. Fox to Mr. Grenville. Letter: Mr. Grenville to Mr. Fox. (Extract). Dr. Franklin's Journal (Extract). The Duke of Grafton's Autobiography. (Extracts).. Letter: Mr. Fox to The King. (Extract). Lord Shelburne's instructions to Sir Guy Carleton and Vice-Admiral 42 28 34 34 *The page references in this Table of Contents are to the pages of the original publication, which are shown inset in this publication. |