I am instructed by the President to convey to you his desire that, on the receipt of this letter, you immediately address a representation of the whole subject to Her Majesty's Government, earnestly remonstrate against the illegal and vexatious proceedings of the authorities of Nova Scotia towards our fishermen, and request that measures be forthwith adopted by Her Majesty's Government to remedy the evils arising out of this misconstruction, on the part of the provincial authorities, of their conventional obligations, and to prevent the possibility of the recurrence of similar acts.

It is important that this subject should be acted upon without delay, as in the House of Assembly of Nova Scotia, at the session of 1839-40, an address to the Queen was voted, suggesting the extension to the adjoining British Colonies, of rules and regulations relating to the fisheries similar to those in actual operation in that province, which have proved so onerous to American fishermen, and efforts, it is understood, are still making to induce the other colonies

to unite with Nova Scotia in her restrictive system. Some of 125 the provisions of her code, supposed to be substantially the

same with those of the provincial law above referred to, are of the most extraordinary character. For instance, a foreign vessel preparing to fish within three miles of the coast of Her Majesty's dominions in America, is, together with her cargo, to be forfeited; in cases of seizure the owner or claimant of the vessel, &c., to be held to prove his innocence or pay treble costs; he is forced to try his action within three months; to give a month's notice to the seizing officer, which notice must contain everything intended to be proved against him, before a suit can be instituted; and also to prove that the notice has been given. The seizing officer is almost wholly irresponsible, since he is liable to no prosecution; if the judge certify that there was probable cause, and the plaintiff in such suit, if he be successful, is only entitled to two pence damages without costs, the defendant to be fined not more than one shilling, &c., &c. In short, some of these rules and regulations are violations of well established principles of the common law of England and of the principles of all just powers and all civilized nations, and seem to be expressly designed to enable her Majesty's authorities, with perfect impunity, to seize and confiscate American vessels, and to embezzle, almost indiscriminately, the property of our citizens employed in the fisheries on the coasts of the British possessions.

In pointing out to her Majesty's government the points in these regulations which have proved or are likely to prove most injurious and oppressive in their practical operation on the interests of the citizens of the United States, it will also be proper to notice the assertion of the provincial legislature, that the Strait of Canso is a "narrow strip of water completely within and dividing several counties" of the province, and that our use of it is in violation of the convention of 1818. That strait separates Nova Scotia from the island of Cape Breton, which was not annexed to the province until 1820. In 1818, Cape Breton was enjoying a government of its own entirely distinct from Nova Scotia, the strait forming the line of demarcation between them, and being then, as now, a thoroughfare for vessels passing into and out of the Gulf of St. Lawrence. The union of the two Colonies cannot be admitted as vesting in the province the right to close a passage which has been freely and

indisputably used by our citizens since the year 1783, and it is impossible to conceive how the use, on our part, of this right of passage, common it is believed to all other nations, conflicts either with the letter or the spirit of our treaty obligations.

I transmit to you enclosed a printed House document (No. 186) of the last session of Congress, and also a copy of the journal and proceedings of the House of Assembly of Nova Scotia at its session of 1839-40, both of which will be useful to you in the examination of the subject to which this letter relates.

I am, Sir, your obedient servant,

A. STEVENSON, &c., &c., &c.

JOHN FORSYTH.

No. 73.-1841, March 27: Letter from Mr. Stevenson to Lord Pal

merston.

32 UPPER GROSVENOR STREET, March 27, 1841.

The undersigned, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary from the United States, has the honour to acquaint Lord Viscount Palmerston, her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, that he has been instructed to bring to the notice of her Majesty's Government, without delay, certain proceedings of the colonial authorities of Nova Scotia, in relation to the seizure and interruption of the vessels and citizens of the United States engaged in intercourse with the ports of Nova Scotia, and the presecution of the fisheries on its neighbouring coasts, and which, in the opinion of the American government, demand the prompt interposition of her Majesty's government. For this purpose the undersigned takes leave to submit to Lord Palmerston the following representation:

By the first article of the convention between Great Britain and the United States, signed at London, on the 20th of October, 1818, it is provided: "1st. That the inhabitants of the United States shall have forever, in common with the subjects of Great Britain, the liberty to take fish of every kind on that part of the southern coast of Newfoundland which extends from Cape Ray to the Rameau 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, harbors and creeks from Mount Joly, on the southern coast of Labrador, to and through the straits of Belleisle, and thence northwardly indefinitely along the coast, without prejudice, however, to the exclusive rights of the Hudson Bay Company. 2dly. That the American fishermen shall also have liberty forever to dry and cure fish in any part of the unsettled bays, harbors and creeks of the southern portion of the coast of Newfoundland before described, and of the coast of Labrador; the United States renouncing any liberty before enjoyed by their citizens to take fish within three marine miles of any coasts, bays, creeks or harbors of the British dominions in America not included within the above limits, i. e. Newfoundland and Labrador. And 3dly. That American fishermen shall also be admitted to enter such bays or harbors for the purpose of shelter and of repairing damages therein, and also of purchasing wood and obtaining water, under such restrictions only as might be

necessary to prevent their taking, drying or curing fish therein, or abusing the privileges reserved to them.' Such are the stipulations of the treaty, and they are believed to be too plain and explicit to

leave room for doubt or misapprehension, or render the discus126 sion of the respective rights of the two countries at this time necessary. Indeed it does not appear that any conflicting questions of right between them have as yet arisen out of differences of opinion regarding the true intent and meaning of the treaty. It appears, however, that in the actual application of the provisions of the convention, (committed on the part of Great Britain to the hands of subordinate agents, subject to and controlled by local legislation,) difficulties, growing out of individual acts, have unfortunately sprung up from time to time, among the most important of which have been recent seizures of American vessels for supposed violations of the treaty. These have been made, it is believed, under color of a provincial law of 6 William IV., chapter 8, 1836, passed doubtless with a view to restrict vigorously, if not intended to aim a fatal blow at the fisheries of the United States on the coasts of Newfoundland.

It also appears, from information recently received by the Government of the United States, that the provincial authorities assume a right to exclude the vessels of the United States from all their bays, (even including those of Fundy and Chaleurs,) and likewise to prohibit their approach within three miles of a line drawn from headland to headland, instead of from the indents of the shores of the provinces. They also assert the right of excluding them from British ports, unless in actual distress; warning them to depart, or get under weigh and leave harbor, whenever the provincial customhouse or British naval officer shall suppose that they have remained a reasonable time; and this without a full examination of the circumstances under which they may have entered the port. Now, the fishermen of the United States believe (and it would seem that they are right in their opinion, if uniform practice in [is] any evidence of correct construction), that they can with propriety take fish any where on the coasts of the British provinces, if not nearer than three marine miles to land, and have the right to resort to their ports for shelter, wood and water; nor has this claim, it is believed, ever been seriously disputed, based as it is on the plain and obvious terms of the convention. Indeed, the main object of the treaty was not only to secure to American fishermen, is [in] the pursuit of their employment, the right of fishing, but likewise to insure to them as large a proportion of the conveniences afforded by the neighbouring coasts of British settlements, as might be reconcilable with the just rights and interests of British subjects, and the due administration of her Majesty's dominions. The construction therefore, which has been attempted to be put upon the stipulations of the treaty by the authorities of Nova Scotia, is directly in conflict with their object, and entirely subversive of the rights and interests of the citizens of the United States. It is one moreover, which would lead to the abandonment, to a great extent, of a highly important branch of American industry, which could not for a moment be admitted by the government of the United States. The undersigned has also been instructed to acquaint Lord Palmerston that the American government has received information that in the House of Assembly of Nova Scotia during the session of 1839-'40, an address to her Majesty was voted,

suggesting the extension to adjoining British colonies of rules and regulations relating to the fisheries, similar to those in actual operation in that province, and which have proved so onerous to the fishermen of the United States; and that efforts, it is understood, are still making to induce the other colonies to unite with Noya Scotia in this restrictive system. Some of the provisions of her code. are of the most extraordinary character. Among these is one which declares that any foreign vessel preparing to fish within three miles of the coast of her Majesty's dominions in America shall, together with her cargo, be forfeited; that in all cases of seizure, the owner or claimant of the vessel, &c., shall be held to prove his innocence, or pay treble costs; that he shall be forced to try his action within three months, and give one month's notice at least to the seizing officer, containing everything intended to be proved against him, before any suit can be instituted; and also prove that the notice has been given. The seizing officer, moreover, is almost wholly irresponsible, inasmuch as he is liable to no prosecution if the judge certifies that there was probable cause; and the plaintiff, if successful in his suit, is only to be entitled to two pence damages without costs, and the defendant fined not more than one shilling. In short, some of these rules and regulations are violations of well established principles of the common law of England, and of the principles of the just laws of all civilized nations, and would seem to have been designed to enable her Majesty's authorities to seize and confiscate with impunity American vessels, and embezzle indiscriminately the property of American citizens employed in the fisheries on the coasts of the British provinces.

It may be proper, also, on this occasion, to bring to the notice of her Majesty's government the assertion of the provincial legislature "that the Gut or Strait of Canso is a narrow strip of water, completely within and dividing several counties of the province," and that the use of it by the vessels and citizens of the United States is in violation of the treaty of 1818. This strait separates Nova Scotia. from the island of Cape Breton, which was not annexed to the province until the year 1820. Prior to that, in 1818, Cape Breton was enjoying a government of its own, entirely distinct from Nova Scotia, the strait forming the line of demarcation between them, and being then, as now, a thoroughfare for vessels passing into and out of the Gulf of St. Lawrence. The union of the two colonies cannot, therefore, be admitted, as vesting in the province the right to close a passage which has been freely and indisputably used by the citizens of the United States since the year 1783. It is impossible, moreover, to conceive how the use on the part of the United States of this right of passage, common, it is believed to all other nations, can in any manner conflict with the letter or spirit of the existing treaty stipulations. The undersigned would therefore fain hope that her Majesty's government will be disposed to meet, as far as practicable, the wishes of the American government, in accomplishing in the fullest and most liberal manner the objects which both governments had in view in entering into the conventional arrangement of 1818.

He has accordingly been instructed to bring the whole subject under the consideration of her Majesty's government, and to remonstrate on the part of his government against the illegal and vexatious

proceedings of the authorities of Nova Scotia against the citi127 zens of the United States engaged in the fisheries, and to request that measures may be forthwith adopted by her Majesty's government to remedy the evils arising out of the misconstruction on the part of its provincial authorities of their conventional obligations, and prevent the possibility of the recurrence of similar acts.

The undersigned renews to Lord Palmerston assurances of his distinguished consideration. A. STEVENSON.

No. 74.-1841, May 8: Despatch from the Right Hon. Viscount Falkland to the Right Hon. Lord John Russell.

No. 75.

GOVERNMENT HOUSE: Halifax, May 8th 1841. MY LORD, I have had the honour to receive your Despatch No. 45. date of 9th April 1841. transmitting a copy of a letter from the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, enclosing a note from the American Minister at the Court of St: James's, complaining of certain proceedings of the colonial authorities of Nova Scotia, towards the vessels and citizens of the Republic engaged in fishing on the coasts of the province, and desiring that I will make immediate inquiry into the allegations made by Mr. Stevenson, and forward to you a detailed report on the subject. I have lost no time in obeying your instructions and beg to submit the following observations for your consideration.

Mr. Stevenson commences his representation by citing the first article of the Convention entered into between Great Britain and the United States on the 20th. October 1818, and signed at London; and having done so, he says,

Such are the stipulations of the Treaty, and they are believed to be too plain and explicit to leave room for misapprehension, or render the discussion of the respective rights of the two countries at this time necessary: indeed it does not appear that any conflicting questions of right between them have as yet arisen out of the differences of opinion regarding the true intent and meaning of the Treaty, it appears however that in the actual application of the provisions of the Convention, (committed on the part of Great Britain to the hands of subordinate agents. subject to, and controlled by local legislation) difficulties growing out of individual acts have unfortunately sprung up from time to time, among the most important of which have been recent seizures, of American vessels for supposed violations of the Treaty. These have been made it is believed, under colour of a provincial law of the 6th of Wm. 4th. cap: 8. passed doubtless with a view to restrict rigorously, if not intended to aim a fatal blow at the fisheries of the United States on the coast of Newfoundland. It also appears from information recently received by the Govt: of the United States, that the provincial authorities assume a right to exclude the vessels of the United States, from all their bays even including those of Fundy, and Chaleurs, and likewise to prohibit their approach within three miles of a line drawn from headland to headland, instead of from the indents of the shores of the province.

The difficulties which exist, and of which Mr. Stevenson complains, as growing out of "individual acts" are created by the difference of the interpretation put by the Nova Scotians and the Americans, upon "the true intent and meaning " of the Treaty referred to by his Excellency, and the Act of the Imperial Parliament 59: Geo 3rd. cap: 38, founded on that Treaty, and more fully referred to hereafter, and until formal adjudication resulting from the seizure, and prose