37. WASHINGTON TREATY, The. The Treaty of Washington, between the United States and Great Britain, was signed on 8 May 1871, and had reference to the Alabama claims (q.v.), the fisheries question, the lake, river and canal navigation, the bonding privilege and the Vancouver water boundary question. In the years immediately following the Civil War sev eral causes of acute friction existed between the two countries. Of these the principal was the question of indemnity for the depredations committed by the Alabama and other Southern cruisers, whose construction in England was claimed by the United States to be a violation of neutrality. The second main cause of con tention was the question of the coast fisheries. Under the Reciprocity Treaty of 1854, the fish ermen of each nation were admitted to the in shore coast fisheries of the other. With the expiration of the treaty in 1866 the rights of American fishermen on the Atlantic Coast of Canada were limited to the privileges secured under the convention of 1818, with a modifica tion of 1845 admitting them to the Bay of Fundy. By this they were excluded from talc ing fish within three marine miles of any coasts, bays, creeks or harbors of British North Amer ica, except in special parts of the Newfound land and Labrador coast, and off the Magdalen Islands. The proper interpretation of this three mile limit had been a standing subject of contro versy. It was claimed by Great Britain that the terms of the treaty precluded entrance into the bays: by the United States that it merely forbid a nearer approach to the shores of the bay than a distance of three miles. This left in dispute the right to fish in the Bay of Chaleurs and other important places. (See Cushing, (Treaty of Washington,) ch. v). As a temporary ex pedient since 1866, the Canadian government had sold licenses to American fishermen for a nominal fee. This scheme had proved abortive, for the raising of the license fee in 1868 had re sulted in an almost complete cessation in their use, only 25 being taken out in 1869. The Do minion government, in consequence, by an order in council (8 Jan. 1870) abandoned the system of licenses and equipped cruisers to protect its claims of the coast fisheries. The Alabama claims and the fisheries had been for some time a standing subject for negotiations. A treaty of January 1869 (known as the Johnson-Claren don Treaty) was rejected by the Senate. Negotiations were renewed under President Grant and, at the suggestion of the British government, it was finally decided to appoint a joint high commission to meet at Washington to settle outstanding matters of dispute. The commissioners for the United States were hamilton Fish, Secretary of State; Gen. Robert Schenck, Judge Nelson of the Supreme Court, Ebenezar Hoar and George H. Williams. The British commissioners were Lord de Grey, Sir Stafford Northcote, Sir Edward Thornton Prof. Montague Barnard and Sir John Macdonald, Prime Minister of Canada. Their deliberations lasted from 27 Feb. until 6 May 1871. Of the different points in the treaty agreed upon the most important is that in reference to the Alabama claims, on account of its bearing upon international law. The matter at issue here was the extent to which Great Britain had been guilty of a breach of neutrality. The Alabama had been built in Birkenhead. The purpose of her construction had been a matter of general notoriety. The British gov ernment had refused to listen to any representa tions that fell short of being technical evidence. Even when the American consul at Liverpool furnished the needed proof, the dilatory action of the government permitted the cruiser to de part unmolested. The question was whether, in reference to the Alabama and other Con federate cruisers, the .government of Great Britain had shown the diligence demanded of a neutral power (see 42d Congress, 2d Sessn. Senate Exec. Doc. 31 November, pp. 146-51). The commission decided that the claims thus arising °shall be referred to a tribunal of arbi tration to be composed of five arbiters,)) one to be named by the President of the United States, one by Her Britannic Majesty, one by the King of Italy, one by the President of the Swiss Confederation and one by the Emperor of Brazil. The questions considered were to be
decided by a majority. Article 6 of the treaty declares: "In deciding the matters submitted to the arbitrators they shall be governed by the following three rules, which are agreed upon by the high contracting parties as rules to be taken as applicable to the case, and by such principles of international law not inconsistent therewith as the arbitrators shall determine to have been applicable to the case: A neutral government is bound: First, to use due dili gence to prevent the fitting out, arming or equipping, within its jurisdiction, of any vessel which it has reasonable ground to believe is intended to cruise or to carry on war against a power with which it is at peace; and also to use like diligence to prevent the departure from its jurisdiction of any vessel intended to cruise or carry on war as above, such vessel having been specially adapted, in whole or in part, within such jurisdiction, to warlike use. Sec ondly, not to permit or suffer either belligerent to make use of its ports or waters as the base of naval operations against the other, or for the purpose of renewal or augmentation of military supplies or arms, or the recruitment of men. Thirdly, to exercise due diligence in its own ports and waters, and, as to all persons within its jurisdiction, to prevent any violation of the foregoing obligations and The tribunal thus arranged met at Geneva (December 1871) and in September 1872 rendered its decision "that the British government had failed to use due diligence in the performance of its neutral obligations?' and awarded an indemnity of $15,500,000 to the United States. In regard to the fisheries, the treaty practically re-estab lished the status under the Reciprocity Treaty of 1854, throwing open the inshore fisheries of the Atlantic Coast north of latitude to the fishermen of both nations (Art. XVIII, XIX). It also established reciprocal free trade in fish and fish oil (Art. XXI) and decided that com missioners should be appointed to determine what extra compensation, if any, should be paid by the United States for the privileges thus acquired. A compensation of $5,500,000 was subsequently awarded by the Halifax Fisheries Commission (1878). The location of the north western boundary (see NORTHWEST BOUNDARY DISPUTE) which under the treaty of 1846 was declared to follow the 49th parallel "to the mid dle of the channel which separates the conti nent from Vancouver's Island and thence south erly through the middle of the said channel and Fuca Straits to the Pacific Ocean?) was left (Art. XXXIV) to the decision of the Ger man Emperor. It was further agreed (Art. XXVI) that the navigation of the river Saint Lawrence shall forever remain free and open for the purpose of commerce to the citizens of the United States. The United States in re turn declared the Yukon, Porcupine and Stikine open to British commerce (Art. XXVI), granting also to British subjects the right of navigating Lake Michigan, the use of the Saint Clair Flats Canal on terms of equality with inhabitants of the United States. The bonding privilege (Art. XXIX) was mutually conceded. The fisheries provisions were not to go into effect until the "laws required to carry them into operation') should be passed by the British and Canadian Parliaments, the legisla ture of Prince Edward Island and the Congress of the United States. The entire treaty was to remain in force for 10 years, after which certain articles — the fisheries arrangement, the right of navigating Lake Michigan and the bonding privilege — might be terminated on two years' notice from either party. The fisheries clauses of the treaty were subsequently renounced by the United States, and after due notice ex pired 1 July 1885. For further details the work of Cushing (mentioned above) may be con sulted. The text of the treaty is in and Conventions of the United States' (1889). For the part played by Sir John Macdonald (q.v.) in the negotiations and their relation to Canadian politics, see Pope, (Memoirs of Sir John A. Macdonald,' Vol. II, ch. xix-xxi.