an end in 1885. A temporary arrangement was entered into for that year, under which the American fishermen continued to enjoy the privileges accorded them by the terminated articles, in consideration of President Cleveland's undertaking to recommend to Congress, when it should again assemble, the appointment of a joint commission to consider both the question of the fisheries and that of trade relations. The recommendation was submitted to Congress, but it was not adopted; and on the opening of the fishing season of 1886, seizures of American vessels began to be made. A sharp controversy followed, reviving questions not only as to the construction of the convention of 1818, but also as to the right of fishing vessels to participate in enlarged privileges of intercourse established since that time. What were the "bays" intended by the convention? Did they include only bodies of water not more than six marine miles wide at the mouth, or all bodies of water bearing the name of bays? Were the three marine miles to be measured from a line following the sinuosities of the coast, or from a line drawn from headland to headland, even where there might be no body of water bearing the name of a bay? Were American fishing vessels forbidden to traffic or to obtain supplies, even when they entered the colonial ports for one of the four purposes specified in the convention? All these questions were raised and elaborately argued. By an act of

March 3, 1887, Congress authorized the President in his discretion to adopt measures of retaliation. A negotiation was, however, subsequently undertaken, which resulted in the Bayard-Chamberlain treaty of February 15, 1888. Provision was made for delimiting the waters in which American fishermen were to be forbidden to fish. To this end, certain definite lines were expressly drawn; and, apart from these, the rule, followed in the North Sea and other fishery arrangements, was adopted, of treating as territorial waters all bays not more than ten miles wide at the mouth, the theory being that fishing could not be carried on in a free space of less than four miles, without constant danger of entering exclusive waters. Fishing vessels, when entering bays or harbors for any of the four purposes specified in the convention of 1818, were not to be required to enter or clear, unless remaining more than twenty-four hours or communicating with the shore, or to pay port dues or charges; and they were to be allowed to transship or sell their cargoes in case of distress or casualty, and to obtain on all occasions "casual or needful provisions and supplies," as distinguished from original outfits. Each vessel was to be duly numbered; but the penalty of forfeiture was to be imposed only for fishing in exclusive British waters, or for preparing in such waters to fish therein; and for any other violation of the fishery laws the penalty was not to exceed three dollars for every ton of the implicated vessel.

It was further stipulated that all restrictions should be removed from the purchase of bait, supplies, and outfits, the transshipment of catch, and the shipping of crews, whenever the United States should remove the duty from the fishery products of Canada and Newfoundland. This treaty enjoys the distinction of being the only one that was ever, by formal resolution of the Senate, discussed in open session, so that the speeches upon it may be found in the daily record of the Congressional debates. Late in August, 1888, after a long and animated debate, it was rejected. President Cleveland then recommended to Congress a definite course of retaliation, looking immediately to the suspension of the bonded-transit system. This recommendation failed; and a modus vivendi, which was arranged by the negotiators of the defeated treaty at the time of its signature, and under which a system of licenses was established, continued for the time being to operate by virtue of Canadian orders in council. The fisheries question was one of the subjects considered by the Quebec commission of 1898, but no conclusive results on any matter were reached by that body.

In recent years various efforts have been made to create closer relations between the United States and Canada. In 1908 and 1909 treaties were concluded for the more complete definition and demarcation of the international boundary; for the adoption of measures (which the United States afterwards failed

10

to make effective) for the preservation and propagation of food fishes in the waters contiguous to the two countries; for the conveyance through the one country of persons in lawful custody for trial or punishment in the other; for reciprocal rights in wrecking and salvage in waters contiguous to the boundary; and for the regulation of the use of boundary waters in such manner as to preserve their navigability while promoting industrial interests.

By an agreement of January 27, 1909, the north Atlantic fisheries dispute was referred to The Hague Court. Five arbitrators sat, and, September 7, 1910, signed the award,1 holding that Great Britain, or the local colony, might by laws or ordinances designed to preserve the fisheries or public order and morals, but subject to review by a mixed commission of experts, regulate the exercise of the "liberties" not renounced in 1818; that, while persons not inhabiting the United States might be enrolled on American fishing-vessels, they gained no treaty immunities; that such vessels, though exempt from commercial formalities, and from dues not imposed on British fishermen, should, if proper conveniences existed, report their presence, and, even when coming in for shelter, repairs, wood, or water, might be required when staying over forty-eight hours similarly to report, personally or by telegraph. Amer

1 Dr. H. Lammasch (Austria), who presided; Jonkheer A. F. De Savornin Lohman (The Netherlands); the Hon. George Gray (United States); Sir Charles Fitzpatrick (Canada); Dr. Luis M. Drago (Argentina), who dissented on one point.

ican fishing-vessels, if commercially documented, might, it was held, exercise commercial privileges, but not when on a fishing voyage. The award, adopting the provisions of the Bayard-Chamberlain arrangement, delimited certain waters as exclusively British, and for the rest recommended, as to bays, the ten-mile rule. The right of the Americans to fish on the treaty coasts of Newfoundland and the Magdalen Islands, was affirmed.

On January 6, 1911, a reciprocal commercial agreement was submitted to the legislative bodies of the United States and Canada. Certain incidents, among which were the utterances of American public men, turned the discussion in Canada to the question of preserving "Canadian nationality"; and on an appeal to the country, the agreement was decisively rejected. The wood-pulp and paper schedules had, as the result of anticipatory legislation, at once taken effect in the United States, and, when the agreement failed, other countries exporting those articles made claims for their admission to the United States on the same terms as similar Canadian products. These claims the customs authorities denied, but the courts subsequently upheld them.

In its later phases the discussion of the northeastern fisheries came to involve only to a comparatively slight extent any question as to the use of the open sea. Very different in that respect was the Bering Sea controversy, which arose in regard to the fur-seals in 1886. By an imperial ukase or edict of