The attention of government was now occupied by the questions which the late treaty had brought forward. The French court, more anxious than ever for the interests of their fishery, had started a doubt about the limits at Newfoundland, which drew on a long discussion at the board of trade. It had been intimated in the before-mentioned project of arrangement, and was afterwards pressed in a special memorial from the French ambassador, that _Point Riche_, mentioned in the treaty of Utrecht, was the same as _Cape Ray_; and that the French limits on that side should, therefore, be extended as low as _Cape Ray_. This piece of geography was, on their part, founded on no better authority than a map of _Herman Moll_; and was shewn, by the board of trade in a representation, drawn with great accuracy and much at length, to be without any foundation. In this report of the board, it is demonstrated that all the French geographers united with those of England in assigning different places to _Point Riche_ and _Cape Ray_, and that the wording of several public papers and documents, made it beyond all doubt the clear intention of both nations, that the French limits should end at _Point Riche_, and should not come down so low as _Cape Ray_, confining the French to the limit called _Petit Nord_[69]. The proceedings of the French at this time gave great uneasiness. At the close of this year, the board of trade made a representation to his majesty, respecting several ships of war being sent by the French to _St. Pierre_ and _Miquelon_, which had been ceded to them by the peace; these, it was supposed, were sent thither, with a view to a sudden rupture, or at least to give improper countenance and hopes to the French in those parts; at any rate such a measure was considered as contrary to the treaty, by which those places were ceded merely as a shelter to the French fishermen[70]. It was feared a fishery was meant to be forced there out of the French limits, and an illicit trade carried on with the Indians. The ruinous state of our forts and fortifications in Newfoundland made these appearances the more alarming. It was therefore, recommended to put the forts upon a respectable footing[71]. [Sidenote: Representation 1765.] The board still kept in view the improvement of the advantages obtained for the fisheries in those parts, amongst which that of Newfoundland was the chief; and on the 29th of April 1765, they made a second representation to his majesty, more full than either of the former; and for those who wish to be informed of the nature of this trade, a very fit companion to the representation made in the year 1718. This was followed by a third, dated the 27th of March 1766, which also deserves particular attention.