States to ensure to British subjects the privilege stipulated by the Treaty of 1871. In the above-mentioned Memorandum my attention was called to an Act of Congress of September 26, 1850, which empowers the Secretary of the Treasury to permit vessels laden with the products of Canada to lade or unlade at any port or place within any collection district of the United States which he might designate. The substance of this Act is to be found in Section 3129 of the "Revised Statutes of the United States." During my visit to the State Department on the 9th instant, I called Mr. Fish's attention to the Act in question, again urging upon him that the stipulation of Article XXVII of the Treaty of 1871 should not be rendered illusory by appealing to an Act of 1799 (see Section 2771, "Revised Statutes of the United States "),which obliges vessels arriving from abroad to discharge at the first port of entry at which they touch. Mr. Fish seemed to be unaware of the existence of the Act of 1850, and said that he would consult with the Secretary of the Treasury upon the subject. He has since told me that he has spoken to Mr. Bristow, and that the result of their conversation is that he will address a communication to him, suggesting that he should avail himself of the power granted by the Act of 1850, and should name Albany and Troy as two points at which vessels coming with produce from Canada might discharge their cargo and take in a return cargo. These two places are, as it were, at the head of the tide-waters of the Hudson; and it appears to me that if Canadian vessels were allowed to reach them, they would enjoy the navigation of the whole length of the canals in the State of New York. Mr. Fish assured me that American vessels arriving with cargo from Canada were also now obliged to unload at the first port of entry at which they touched, and that if they were hereafter allowed to go on to Albany or Troy, they would not be allowed to discharge at any intervening point. The same restriction would be imposed upon Canadian vessels ; and, further, the latter would not be allowed to transport cargo from one port to another in the United States, which operation would be one of coasting trade, now reserved to American vessels. The Earl of Derby. EDWD. THORNTON. No. 28.-The Earl of Dufferin to the Earl of Carnarvon. MY LORD, Ottawa, April 6, 1876. I HAVE the honour to transmit herewith, for your Lordship's information, a copy of a report of my Privy Council, a duplicate of which I have this day communicated to Her Majesty's Minister st Washington, relative to the nagivation by Canadian vessels of canals in the United States under the Treaty of Washington. The Earl of Carnarvon. I have, &c., DUFFERIN. (Inclosure.)-Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General on the 5th April, 1876. THE Committee of Council have had under consideration the Report of the Honourable the Minister of Customs, to whom has been referred the correspondence with the Washington Government concerning the navigation of the United States' canals by Canadian vessels. The Minister states that he has considered the representations made by Mr. Secretary Fish in his despatch of the 27th September, 1875, in which he remarks: "The law of the United States provided that a vessel arriving in the United States with a cargo from abroad should enter and discharge her cargo at the first port of entry she met, and that he supposed that the idea and object of the Canadian Government were that the Canadian boats should be enabled to bring cargo from Canada through the canals and down the Hudson through to New York. That this is impossible by reason of the above provisions of the law with regard to the first port of entry, and because neither by the Treaty of Washington nor by any other Treaty had the navigation of the River Hudson been allowed to British or other foreign vessels." The Minister further states that, in a subsequent despatch of Mr. Secretary Bristow, dated the 9th October, 1875, after reciting the circumstances and quoting the several laws bearing upon the case, he concludes with the following definite statement: : "In the face of the construction given to the Treaty by Congress, this Department does not feel authorized to recognize the right of Canadian vessels to transport cargoes in bond from Canada to New York." The Minister observes that, in this decision, apart from Treaty obligations, the Secretary of the Treasury does not appear to have taken into consideration an Act of Congress passed on the 26th September, 1850, which is to be found in the Statutes at large, page 469, and which has been re-enacted and confirmed in the Revised Statutes of 1875, page 603, sec. 3129, intituled "An Act to authorize the Secretary of the Treasury to permit vessels from the British North American provinces to lade and unlade at such places in any collection district in the United States as he may designate." That this Act provides that "the Secretary of the Treasury, with the approbation of the President of the United States, provided the latter shall be satisfied that similar privileges are extended to vessels of the United States in the Colonies hereinafter mentioned, is hereby authorized, under such regulations as he may prescribe to protect the revenue from fraud, to permit vessels laden with the products of Canada, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland, and Prince Edward Island, or either of them, to lade or unlade at any port or place within any collection district which he may designate." The Minister, therefore, recommends that your Excellency be requested to communicate with Sir Edward Thornton, Her Majesty's Minister at Washington, and request him to call the attention of the Government of the United States to the above-recited Act, and to press upon that Government the making of such arrangements as will at once secure the same privileges to Canadian vessels in United States' canals as are accorded to United States' vessels in Canadian canals. The Committee concur in the foregoing recommendation, and submit the same for your Excellency's approval. Certified: W. A. HIMSWORTH. No. 31.-Sir E. Thornton to the Earl of Derby.-(Received May 20.) MY LORD, Washington, May 8, 1876. I HAVE the honour to inclose copy of a note and of its inclosure which I have received from Mr. Fish relative to the navigation of the canals in the State of New York by Canadian vessels. In this note Mr. Fish transmits me copy of a communication from the Treasury Department, of which, though the language is obscure, the substance seems to be that Canadian vessels may pass to the southern terminus of the Champlain Canal. During my interview with Mr. Fish on the 4th instant I pointed out to him that I did not quite understand what the Champlain Canal signified, nor where was its southern terminus, and that I thought that if it was really intended to comply with the terms of the Treaty of 1871, it would be desirable to express that intention in clearer words. Mr. Fish replied that he considered that the Champlain Canal signified the canal leading from the southern extremity of Lake Champlain, and connecting it with Troy and Albany, and that Albany was the southern terminus of that canal. This canal is generally called the Whitehall Canal. I further asked whether Canadian vessels would be able to avigate the Erie Canal, which begins at Buffalo from Lake Erie, and the Oswego Canal, which enters from Lake Ontario at Oswego, and connects with the Erie Canal, and to proceed through those canals to Albany. Mr. Fish answered that he understood that Canadian vessels could certainly navigate those canals; but upon my saying that I was not satisfied that this could be inferred from the contents of the communication from the Treasury Department, he suggested that I should address him a note expressing my views upon the subject. In accordance with this suggestion I addressed to Mr. Fish the note of which I have the honour to inclose a copy, but to which I have not as yet received an answer. I have also forwarded copies of the two notes to the Governor-General of Canada. The Earl of Derby. I have, &c., EDWD. THORNTON, No. 35.-Sir E. Thornton to the Earl of Derby.-(Received June 25.) (Extract.) Washington, June 12, 1876. I HAVE the honour to inclose copy of a note which I have at length received from Mr. Fish, relative to the navigation of the canals of the State of New York by Canadian vessels. On its receipt I at once sent a copy of it to the Governor-General of Canada, and at the same time telegraphed to his Excellency informing him that I had received it; for, as this is the season when the produce of Canada is for the most part transported into the State of New York, I was aware that the Canadian Government would be anxious to be informed that the navigation of the canals of that State was open to Canadian vessels. As far as I am able to judge, the terms of Mr. Fish's note are satisfactory, and Canadian vessels with cargoes may now proceed by Lake Champlain and the Whitehall and Erie Canals to Troy and Albany, or by the Erie Canal, entering either at Buffalo from Lake Eric, or at Oswego from Lake Ontario, to Albany and Troy. I hope, however, soon to receive from Lord Dufferin the acquiescence of the Canadian Government in the orders which have at length been given. The Earl of Derby. SIR, EDWD. THORNTON. (Inclosure.)—Mr. Fish to Sir E. Thornton. Department of State, Washington, June 7, 1876. REFERRING to previous correspondence upon the subject of the navigation of the canals of the United States by Canadian vessels, under Article XXVII of the Treaty of Washington, I have now the honour to inform you that I am informed by the Secretary of the Treasury that instructions have been issued to the Collector of Customs at Plattsburgh, New York, to allow Canadian barges and other vessels laden with imported goods to pass that port, on a clearance to Albany, or to any port intermediate between Plattsburgh and Albany, under such conditions and regulations as would govern the navigation of American barges or vessels coming from Canada, under Section 3102 of the Revised Statutes, or under such regulations as would apply to foreign vessels generally when import ing foreign cargoes, under Section 4317 of the Revised Statutes, but without regard to the several provisions in this section which apply especially to imported goods transported in bond. I am further informed that the Collector has been instructed to allow free transit to all return cargoes shown by the manifests of Canadian vessels to be destined for Canada. It is further stated that instructions, similar in tenour and object to those addressed to the Collector at Plattsburgh, will be given to the Collector of Customs at Buffalo and Oswego, New York, and Burlington, Vermont, and that the Surveyor of Customs at Albany, and the Deputy Collector at Troy, New York, will be notified of these orders. I have, &c., Sir E. Thornton. HAMILTON FISH. GERMAN LAW, respecting the Union of Alsace and Lorraine with the German Empire.-Berlin, June 9, 1871. (Translation.) WE, William, by the grace of God German Emperor, King of Prussia, &c., decree herewith in the name of the German Empire, and with the assent of the Bundesrath and of the Reichstag, as follows: § 1. The districts of Alsace and Lorraine ceded by France according to Article I of the Preliminary Peace of February 1871,* become between the limits fixed by Article I of the Treaty of Peace of May 10, 1871,† and the 3rd Supplementary Article of that Treaty, united for ever with the German Empire. § 2. The constitution of the German Empire§ comes into force in Alsace and Lorraine on January 1, 1873. of By decree of the Emperor, with the assent of the Unional Council, single parts the Constitution can be earlier introduced. The needful alterations in and complements to the Constitution require the assent of the Imperial Parliament. * Vol. LXII. Page 59. + Vol. LXII. Page 77. § Vol. LXI. Page 58. |