Captain Taverner, who had great experience in that trade, and was much attended to at this time, gave in to the board some remarks on the Newfoundland fishery and trade; and also heads of a proposed act of parliament[17]. It appears from the observations made by this gentleman, as well as many others, that nothing was more strongly expressed by all persons, who shewed any anxiety, or experience on this subject, than the inefficiency of Stat. 10 & 11 Will. 3, and the necessity of going to parliament for new regulations.
It had become a doubt, whether that part of the island, lately ceded by the French, was subject to the provisions of Stat. 10 & 11 Will. 3. This point was brought forward, in consequence of the lieutenant-governor of the garrison at Placentia, and some of the French planters having, on leaving the place, disposed of their plantations for money, and, in this manner, attempted to convey a right and property, which was not recognised by the general usage of the island, as confirmed by that statute. This matter was brought before the board of trade, and their lordships were of opinion, that Stat. 10 & 11 Will. 3. extended to the ceded lands, and that all the beaches, and plantations there, ought to be left to the public use, and be disposed of, as directed by that act[18]. Instructions to that effect were accordingly given to the lieutenant-governor of Placentia[19].
Among the proposals and suggestions for improving the trade of Newfoundland, some papers from Mr. Campbell, in the year 1714 are deserving of notice[20].
The Newfoundland trade was taken up by the government in the year 1715, as an object of important consideration. Captain Kempthorn, then on that station, was specially charged to make enquiry, and report every information he could acquire; and I find a very long letter written by him to the secretary of the admiralty, and transmitted from thence to the board of trade. This letter is very full, and was submitted by the board to the king’s government, as containing suggestions highly deserving consideration[21]. The board were now satisfied that some new regulation ought to be made by parliament; and preparatory thereto, they resolved to write to the towns in the west, concerned in this trade, desiring them to furnish such information as they possessed upon a subject where they had so much experience[22]. They also laid a case before the attorney general, Sir Edward Northey, for his opinion on the defects of Stat. 10 & 11 Will. 3. and he was of opinion, that it would be necessary, in order to oblige the observation of the rules contained in that statute, for a new act to be passed, inflicting penalties for not observing the same, and directing how and where such penalties should be paid; and he thought that a proclamation, requiring the observance of those rules (as was before proposed) would have no effect[23]. On this occasion. Mr. Taverner suggested his remarks, and gave a sketch of a bill[24]. After the board had derived the information that was to be obtained from the different sources, where they had applied, they drew up a long representation to his majesty, dated the 2d of March 1715-6 containing their opinion upon the abuses, suggesting the remedies that would be proper to be applied[25], and recommending that a bill should be proposed to parliament for giving effect to the suggestions there made.
Representation 1718.
Nothing was at that time done; but the board continued to pursue the course they had taken for obtaining information: for in August 1718, we find a very full answer given in by Captain Passenger upon the whole of the subject of the trade and fishery; and in December following, the board made a representation to his majesty, more elaborate, full, and comprehensive, than any performance that had yet been seen, respecting this trade and fishery; and to this they afterwards added the heads of a bill, to be proposed to parliament, for establishing the trade and fishery, and correcting the abuses to which it had been subject[26]. This representation, and the heads of the bill, have been lately laid before the house of commons, and are now printed by their order.
Claim of the Guipuscoans to fish.
About this time, the Guipuscoans had set up an antient right to fish at Newfoundland; and application had been made to our court for asserting and allowing this claim. This matter was referred to the board of trade; and that board did, on the 11th of September 1719, make a representation to the lords justices; in which they say, that by the fifteenth article of the treaty of Utrecht, the Guipuscoans could claim no right, but such as they could make out by some prior title; they then recapitulated the ancient history of our discovery and possession of the island; and that by stat. 10 and 11 Will. 3. all aliens are expressly excluded from the fishery; and they conclude, that the island and the fishery are the undoubted property of his majesty, and that the Guipuscoans had no manner of right to fish or trade there[27]. They take this occasion to remind the lords justices of the representation they had made last year, and of the heads of a bill then suggested for better regulating the fishery.