It was arranged, it will be remembered, under the Washington
Treaty that the peoples of the United States and of Canada should have the right of fishing in each other's waters for twelve years. As the rights were of different value, it was also arranged that the com- pensation to be paid to Canada should be settled by arbitration, the arbitrators being Sir A. Galt for Canada, Mr. Kellogg for the United States, and M. Delfosse, of the Belgian Mission, as umpire. The majority have now awarded Canada £1,100,000, but Mr. Kellogg refuses to sign the award, on the ground "that the advantages accruing to Great Britain under the Treaty of Washington are greater than the advantages conferred upon the United States." We presume him to mean that the fishing rights conceded by the Union are greater than the fishing rights conceded by Canada, but even if the statement were true, he has nothing to do with that. The question submitted to him was a specific matter of account. There is some apprehension that the Washing- ton Government may reject the award, as it was not specifically provided that the decision of the majority should be final, but this is improbable. That Government reads treaties in too lawyer-like a spirit, but it is not ungenerous, it does not wish the fishery question to remain open—there is always war hidden in a quarrel about cod, because the fish can only be protected by cruisers—and it would be loth to discredit finally the principle of arbitration.
Previous page
