No. 195.
Mr. Welsh
to Mr. Evarts.
Legation of
the United States,
London, November 1, 1878.
(Received November 14.)
No. 151.]Sir: The attention of Her Majesty’s Government has
been so anxiously occupied of late with difficulties growing out of the
Berlin treaty and affairs in Afghanistan that I did not anticipate an early
reply to your dispatches Nos. 145 and 150.
The arrival of your telegram on the 29th ultimo, however, gave me a proper
occasion for inquiring when I might expect to receive Lord Salisbury’s
answer, and accordingly, on the afternoon of that day, I went to the foreign
office for that purpose. I found there the ambassadors of France, Austria,
Germany, and Italy, and the Russian and Turkish chargés d’affaires, waiting
for an audience of his lordship. When my turn came he received me, as he
always does, very courteously, and stated what I have already communicated
to you in substance by cable, that is to say, that the subject of the
fisheries was entirely new to him; that he was studying it dilligently, and
that he would answer your dispatch in relation to the Halifax award
promptly, so that you should have it before the 23d of the present month. In
regard to the Newfoundland fishery disturbances, he said that he had already
requested to be furnished with the evidence upon which Captain Sulivan had
based his report.
The leading journals here have published telegrams from the United States,
giving the substance of your instruction, No. 150, in regard to those
fishery disturbances, and stating that I was directed not only to read it to
Lord Salisbury but to have it printed. As your dispatch contained no request
to print, I presume this was a mistake of the agent of the associated
press.
These telegrams, so far, have occasioned but little editorial comment here. I
inclose the only one which has come to my notice, in a slip from the Daily
Chronicle of the 31st ultimo.
I have, &c.,
[Inclosure.]
THE FISHERY AWARD.
[Extract from Daily Chronicle, London,
October 31, 1878.]
The American Secretary of State has addressed a dispatch to the English
Government on the subject of the dispute which arose at the beginning of
the year between the fishermen of the United States and those of
Newfoundland. By treaty right the Americans are allowed to fish in
Canadian waters, but the fishermen of Newfoundland considered that the
limits of this right were exceeded when the Americans not only used
their seines in inshore waters, but actually fastened some of them to
the shore. The consequence was a dispute, which resulted in the
Newfoundlanders driving the Americans away, breaking their nets, and
causing the loss of the major portion of
[Page 315]
the fish that had been caught. We believe that the
Americans attribute this action to jealousy rather than to any feeling
of right as regards the inshore fisheries, inasmuch as they possessed
better fishing-tackle than the fishermen of Newfoundland, and were
consequently able to accomplish much greater results. That the matter
should be made the subject of communications between the Governments of
England and the United States was inevitable, and it is reported that
the English foreign office has upheld the action of the Newfoundlanders,
on the ground that colonial regulations forbid the course pursued by the
fishermen of the United States. To this view the American Secretary of
State objects, and in the dispatch to which we have alluded Mr. Evarts
contends that the fishery rights under the treaty must be exercised in
perfect freedom from the restraint of those provincial regulations which
operate to the detriment of the American fishermen. The American
argument is, in short, that the imperial authority must be paramount,
and that the treaty engagements of the imperial government cannot be
rendered nugatory by any provincial statutes. We must admit that there
seems to be justice in this view of the case, and we hope that common
sense will interpose to bring about a settlement of the dispute that
will afford mutual satisfaction, but in expressing regret that this
question should have arisen so near the time for the settlement of the
Halifax award, we think that the American Secretary of State has adopted
a rather unworthy method of putting pressure upon the British
Government. With all respect to Mr. Evarts, we must urge that the
Halifax award has nothing to do with the Newfoundland dispute; and if
the American minister means to insinuate that the United States will not
pay the award unless the American view is adopted in regard to the
Newfoundland fisheries, he will find that his repute will suffer a
greater loss than can be compensated for by any number of dollars saved.
America now shares with England the immortal honor of having settled
certain great questions by means of arbitration, and America has been
fortunate enough to secure the award in the chief cases that were in
dispute. With regard to the Alabama, England was ordered to pay, and did
pay, a sum that much more than sufficed to meet all claims; while in the
case of the island of San Juan, the German Emperor, relying upon
geographical experts who are said to have consulted defective maps,
likewise gave his decision in favor of America. But in the case of the
fisheries, the commission which sat at Halifax pronounced a verdict
which was adverse to American claims. This decision excited much angry
feeling among politicians in the United States, and there were some who
even advocated a refusal to pay the award. But the press and the people
urged an honorable compliance with the terms of the decision, and the
time is approaching when the settlement should be completed. We regret
that Mr. Evarts should have imported this matter into the Newfoundland
discussion, for it tends to the depreciation of that spirit of fair
dealing which we hoped was supreme.
