by either party on the continent of America westward of the Stony Mountains;" or, that the proposed article should be amended in the manner stated in the enclosed copy. 92 No. 37.-1818, October 9: Protocol of the Sixth Conference held between the American and British Plenipotentiaries at Whitehall. Present: Mr. Gallatin, Mr. Rush, Mr. Robinson. The American plenipotentiaries declared that they could not agree to the article upon the fisheries brought forward by the British plenipotentiaries at the preceding conference, nor to that respecting the navigation of the Mississippi, nor to any article that would bring the British in contact with that river. They also stated that they could not take into consideration the article respecting the intercourse with Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, unconnected with the subject of the British West Indies. They presented several amendments (A, B) to the articles respecting the boundary line and slaves carried away, proposed at the last conference by the British plenipotentiaries. It was agreed to meet again on Tuesday, the 13th instant. ALBERT GALLATIN, FREDERICK JOHN ROBINSON. No. 38.-1818, October 10: Extract from letter from Mr. Robinson (Board of Trade) to Viscount Castlereagh. I then proceeded to state to them that upon the fishery article, we were not disposed to insist upon the exclusion of those points, the introduction of which they had at our last conference represented to be a sine quâ non: and after some discussion it was also agreed on our part not to insist upon the two provisions contained in our proposed article respecting the fishing in rivers and smuggling, to which they felt very considerable objections, and which did not appear to me to be of such importance as to require to be urged in a way that might prevent an arrangement upon the fisheries taking place. There still however remains a point undecided upon this question which involves considerations of great moment They represent it to be an indispensable condition on their part that the article respecting the fisheries should be not only permanent in the ordinary sense of conventional stipulations which are limited by no precise time, but permanent in such a way as not to be abrogated by any future war. They have therefore introduced the words for ever" into the article itself; and they accompanied the proposition of it (as your Lordship will see by referring to our despatch No.) with a memorandum explanatory of the view in which they offered, and were ready to sign an article on this subject. Our intention had been to meet this memorandum with a counter declara tion on our part, by which we might avoid being bound by their construction: but they stated to me explicitly, that the presentation of such a declaration would be fatal to the arrangement of the article; that they had endeavoured to frame their memorandum in such a way as to leave us the utmost possible latitude in construing it. This led to a discussion of considerable length in which I argued that the adoption of their view of the subject would involve the British Government in an admission of the very point upon which the two Governments had already been at variance in this matter, viz: that a war did not ex necessitate rei abrogate stipulations of that sort: and that in fact it never could be binding "for ever" because it would necessarily be competent to us to refuse to make peace, unless they would consent to a non-renewal of the stipulation. One of the American plenipotentiaries did not deny the accuracy of my view of the question, but admitted that in his opinion the point was one of very little consequence to them. He added however that their instructions were peremptory on the subject. The principal ground upon which they represented their instructions to be built, was this; that if the arrangement were not to be permanent to all intents and purposes, and in spite of the contingency of a future war, it would necessarily be considered as a positive concession on our part, without which the late war would then be deemed as having deprived them of an important advantage of which they had not secured the renewal at the peace. Finding their instructions on this point to be so peremptory, I took the point ad referendum rather than break off at once upon it. P.S. Although from Mr. Goulburn's absence I am not yet enabled to send to your Lordship, a detailed account of what passed at our preceding conference (the fifth) on the 6th of October, I think it right to enclose for your information, copies of four articles which we then produced as contreprojets to articles upon similar points, previously submitted by the American plenipotentiaries. 93 No. 39.-1818, October 13: Extract from Protocol of the Seventh Conference held between the American and British Plenipotentiaries at Whitehall. Present: Mr. Gallatin, Mr. Rush, Mr. Robinson, Mr. Goulburn. The British plenipotentiaries acquiesced in the amendment proposed at the preceding conference by the American plenipotentiaries, in the article respecting captured slaves, except as far as related to the insertion in the article of the name of any particular Power. They brought forward new articles (A, B, C, D, E) respecting the fisheries, the boundary, impressment, and maritime points, and accompanied the articles D with the annexed memorandum É. They agreed to the omission of the article respecting the Mississippi. It was agreed to meet again on Monday, the 19th instant. ALBERT GALLATIN, FREDERICK JOHN ROBINSON, ARTICLE A. Whereas differences have arisen respecting the liberty claimed by the United States for the inhabitants thereof to take, dry, and cure fish on certain coasts, bays, harbours, and creeks of His Britannic Majesty's dominions in America: it is agreed between the high contracting parties that the inhabitants of the said United States shall have, forever, in common with the subjects of His Britannic Majesty, the liberty to take fish of every kind on that part of the southern coast of Newfoundland which extends from Cape Ray to the Ramea Islands, on the western and northern coast of Newfoundland, from the said Cape Ray to the Quirpon Islands, on the shores of the Magdalen Islands, and also on the coasts, bays, harbours and creeks, from Mount Joli, on the southern coast of Labrador, to and through the Straits of Belleisle, and thence, northwardly, indefinitely, along the coast, without prejudice, however, to any of the exclusive rights of the Hudson's Bay Company; and that the American fishermen shall also have liberty, forever, to dry and cure fish in any of the unsettled bays, harbours, and creeks of the southern part of the coast of Newfoundland, hereabove described, and of the coast of Labrador; but so soon as the same, or any portion thereof, shall be settled, it shall not be lawful for the said fishermen to dry or cure fish at such portion so settled, without previous agreement for such purpose with the inhabitants, proprietors, or possessors of the ground. And the United States hereby renounce, forever, any liberty heretofore enjoyed or claimed by the inhabitants thereof to take, dry, or cure fish on or within three marine miles of any of the coasts, bays, creeks, or harbours of His Britannic Majesty's dominions in America, not included within the above-mentioned limits: Provided, however, that the American fishermen shall be admitted to enter such bays or harbours for the purpose of shelter, and of repairing damages therein, of purchasing wood and obtaining water, and for no other purpose whatever. But they shall be under such restrictions as may be necessary to prevent their taking, drying, or curing fish therein, or in any other manner whatever abusing the privileges hereby reserved to them. ARTICLE B. It is agreed that a line drawn from the most northwestern point of the Lake of the Woods, along the forty-ninth parallel of north latitude, or, if the said point shall not be in the forty-ninth parallel of north latitude, then, that a line drawn from the said point due north or south, as the case may be, until the said line shall intersect the said parallel of north latitude, and from the point of such intersection, due west, along and with the said parallel, shall be the line of demarcation between the territories of His Britannic Majesty and those of the United States; and that the said line shall form the southern boundary of the said territories of His Britannic Majesty, and the northern boundary of the territories of the United States, from the Lake of the Woods to the Stony Mountains. But nothing in the preceding part of this article shall be construed to extend to the northwest coast of America, or to territories belonging to, or claimed by, either party, on the continent of America westward of the Stony Mountains; and any such country as may be claimed by either party westward of the Stony Mountains, shall, together with its harbours, bays, and creeks, and the navigation of all rivers within the same, be free and open to the vessels, subjects, or citizens of the two Powers, respectively, for the purposes of trade and commerce. It being well understood that nothing contained in this article shall be taken to affect the claims of any other Power or State to any part of the said country; the only object of the two high contracting parties being to prevent disputes and differences between themselves. 94 No. 40.-1818, October 20: Extracts from Letter from Messrs. We have the honour to transmit a convention which we concluded this day with the British plenipotentiaries. Lord Castlereagh having expressed a wish that the negotiations might be opened before his departure for Aix-la-Chapelle, Mr. Gallatin left Paris as soon as he had received our full powers, and arrived here on the 16th of August. Our joint instructions contained in your despatch of the 28th of July did not, however, reach us till the 3d of September. We had long conversations with Lord Castlereagh at his country seat, on the 22d and 23d of August, but could not, owing to our instructions not having arrived, discuss with him the questions of the fisheries and of the West India intercourse. He left London on the 1st of September. The official conferences had begun on the 27th of August, and, for the progress of the negotiation, we beg leave to refer to the enclosed copies of the protocol, and documents annexed to it, and of two unofficial notes sent by us to the British plenipotentiaries. We will add some observations on the several objects embraced by the convention. 1. Fisheries. We succeeded in securing, besides the rights of taking and curing fish within the limits designated by our instructions, as a sine qua non, the liberty of fishing on the coasts of the Magdalen Islands, and of the western coast of Newfoundland, and the privilege of entering for shelter, wood, and water, in all the British harbours of North America. Both were suggested as important to our fishermen, in the communications on that subject which were transmitted to us with our instructions. To the exception of the exclusive rights of the Hudson's Bay Company we did not object, as it was virtually implied in the treaty of 1783, and we had never, any more than the British subjects, enjoyed any right there; the charter of that company having been granted in the year 1670. The exception applies only to the coasts and their harbours, and does not affect the right of fishing in Hudson's Bay beyond three miles from the shores, a right which could not exclusively belong to, or be granted by, any nation. The most difficult part of the negotiation related to the permanence of the right. To obtain the insertion in the body of the convention of a provision declaring expressly that that right should not be abrogated by war, was impracticable. All that could be done was to ex press the article in such manner as would not render the right liable to be thus abrogated. The words "for ever" were inserted for that purpose, and we also made the declaration annexed to the protocol of the third conference, the principal object of which was to provide in any event for the revival of all our prior rights. The insertion of the words "for ever" was strenuously resisted. The British plenipotentiaries urged that, in case of war, the only effect of those words being omitted, or of the article being considered as abrogated, would be the necessity of inserting in the treaty of peace a new article renewing the present one; and that, after all that had passed, it would certainly be deemed expedient to do it, in whatever manner the condition was now expressed. We declared that we would not agree to any article on the subject, unless the words were preserved, or in case they should enter on the protocol a declaration impairing their effect. It will also be perceived that we insisted on the clause by which the United States renounce their right to the fisheries relinquished by the convention, that clause having been omitted in the first British counterprojet. We insisted on it with the view-1st. Of preventing any implication that the fisheries secured to us were a new grant, and of placing the permanence of the rights secured and of those renounced precisely on the same footing. 2d. Of its being expressly stated that our renunciation extended only to the distance of three miles from the coasts. This last point was the more important, as, with the exception of the fishery in open boats within certain harbours, it appeared, from the communications above mentioned, that the fishingground, on the whole coast of Nova Scotia, is more than three miles from the shores; whilst, on the contrary, it is almost universally close to the shore on the coasts of Labrador. It is in that point of view that the privilege of entering the ports for shelter is useful, and it is hoped that, with that provision, a considerable portion of the actual fisheries on that coast of Nova Scotia) will, notwithstanding the renunciation, be preserved. 2. Boundary line. This being definitively fixed at the forty-ninth degree of north latitude, from the Lake of the Woods to the Stony Mountains, it is unnecessary to repeat the arguments which were urged on that subject. The attempt was again made to connect with it an article, securing to the British access to the Mississippi, and the right to its navigation. We declared, and entered the declaration in the protocol, that we could not agree to the article, nor to any that would bring the British in contact with that river. The British plenipotentiaries hav 95 ing, by the protocol of the seventh conference, agreed to the omission of the article, that point is also definitely settled. And it may be observed, with reference to the treaty of 1783, that, if the United States have not secured to themselves the whole of the fisheries heretofore enjoyed within the jurisdiction of Great Britain, they have obtained the liberty of curing fish on a part of the southern coast of Newfoundland, and the abandonment of an inconvenient privilege within their own territory. |