CO885-(16-18) — Page 806

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference -

C.O.885

18 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-

COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH—NOT TO

14 May 1907.

184

Fifteenth Day. be necessary by both Canada and Newfoundland, who are both concerned in this matter. I understand Sir Wilfrid Laurier's position is that that is a point on which he is not prepared to express a final opinion, and it would NEWFOUNDLAND have to be brought before the Canadian Government and considered carefully

by them.

FISHERY. (Sir E. Grey.)

Sir WILFRID LAURIER: Yes.

Sir EDWARD GREY: Then if we cannot have to-day a definite opinion on the question of arbitration, I think it is very undesirable that the Con- ference should pass a resolution of that kind, which, once put on record and communicated to the United States, may bring at once from the United States a demand to go to arbitration on the whole Treaty.

Mr. DEAKIN: Is it not rather significant that the Americans have not yet asked for arbitration? Does it not show a certain doubt of their own case?

Sir EDWARD GREY: As far as we are concerned here at the Foreign Office arbitration is the course we should ourselves have taken if it had been a fishery treaty affecting the coast of Cornwall, for instance; but I would be very reluctant, with both Canada and Newfoundland so much concerned, to commit ourselves to arbitration before we have a settled opinion from both of them.

Mr. DEAKIN: But does not the course taken by the Americans suggest that they are not very confident of what would come out of arbitration? If they thought they had a strong case, would not they have asked for it long ago?

Sir EDWARD GREY: There is that; I have never quite understood why they have not.

Sir JOSEPH WARD: Are they getting all they want without it?

Sir ROBERT BOND: Precisely; they have been getting more than they asked for under the modus vivendi.

Dr. JAMESON: Is this modus vivendi more advantageous to the Americans than the one Canada is perfectly satisfied with with regard to this same question?

Sir EDWARD GREY: The modus rivendi with Canada has been working very well. It has not come before the Foreign Office at all.

Dr. JAMESON: Is it on the same terms?

Sir WILFRID LAURIER: It is the modus vivendi suggested by Mr. Chamberlain and Sir Charles Tupper when they negotiated the Treaty of 1888, in which Newfoundland was represented. It would have been accep- table to us-not that it was altogether satisfactory-but we would have accepted it. The American Senate rejected it, but in the meantime Mr. Chamberlain and Sir Charles Tupper suggested that we should give to the Americans all the privileges which are denied by the Treaty of 1818 by We have given them that modus, their taking a licence to fish in our waters.

185

vivendi and they take licences at 1 dollar 50 cents per ton register of each vessel. There are about 120 who take licences every year, and they fish as our own fishermen without any difficulty or trouble.

Dr. JAMESON: And you are perfectly satisfied with it?

Sir WILFRID LAURIER: So far.

Dr. JAMESON: Would Sir Robert Bond be satisfied with such a modus vivendi for Newfoundland?

Sir ROBERT BOND: No.

Sir WILFRID LAURIER: Newfoundland had it, but withdrew from it afterwards.

Sir ROBERT BOND: We withdrew from it in 1890.

Dr. JAMESON: Sir Robert Bond seems perfectly willing to do all they want if they would only take off their duties. It is not merely the pure justice question.

Sir ROBERT BOND: Yes, justice. I am willing that they should have all that they are entitled to under Treaty, but nothing more.

Sir WILFRID LAURIER: The question is simply this: We have the basis of operations in Canadian and Newfoundland waters. They cannot fish in the high seas unless they come to us for bait. They have the market. We have proposed to them again and again, we will exchange with you; we will give you our base of operations if you give us your market, but they want to keep it protected.

Dr. JAMESON: They want the market for themselves and want our bases of operations. It is a pity for the sake of the strength of the case to bring in that possible alternative now of taking off a duty and giving them the base.

Mr. DEAKIN: That is preference for preference.

Dr. JAMESON: It is quite a different subject.

Sir EDWARD GREY: The difficulty of treating the two subjects in pari materia is that we have no Treaty right under which we can claim that they ought to take off their duties. They have a Treaty right about which there is a difficulty to take fish in our waters. If there were no Treaty rights on either side it would be a fair matter of bargain, but they contend that our Treaty rights are being used to put pressure upon them to do something which is not concerned really with the Treaty rights.

Sir ROBERT BOND: Of course Newfoundland's position is that it is not interfering with American Treaty rights in any way; that there is nothing in the Treaty that gives them the title to come down and ship Newfoundlanders to engage as part of their crew, or that exempts them from the operation of municipal law. I do not suggest that it is a matter of arbitration. On the contrary, I took the position this morning when addressing the Conference

49270.

3 A

Fifteenth Day.

14 May 1907.

NEWFOUNDLAND FISHERY.

(Sir

Wilfrid Laurier.)

}