APPENDIX 433 



GROUNDS FOR THE DISSENT 



TO 



the Award on Question V 

 BY 



DR. LUIS M. DRAGO. 



Counsel for Great Britain have very clearly stated that 

 according to their contention the territoriality of the bays 

 referred to in the Treaty of 1818- is immaterial because 

 whether they are or are not territorial, the United States 

 should be excluded from fishing in them by the terms of 

 the renunciatory clause, which simply refers to 'bays, 

 creeks or harbours of His Britannic Majesty's Dominions' 

 without any other qualification or description. If that 

 were so, the necessity might arise of discussing whether or 

 not a nation has the right to exclude another by contract 

 or otherwise from any portion or portions of the high seas. 

 But in my opinion the Tribunal need not concern itself with 

 such general question, the wording of the treaty being clear 

 enough to decide the point at issue. 



Article I begins with the statement that differences have 

 arisen respecting the liberty claimed by the United States 

 for the inhabitants thereof to take, dry and cure fish on 

 * ' certain coasts, bays, harbours and creeks of His Britannic 

 Majesty's Dominions in America,' and then proceeds to 

 locate the specific portions of the coast with its correspond- 

 ing indentations, in which the liberty of taking, drying and 

 curing fish should be exercised. The renunciatory clause, 

 which the Tribunal is called upon to construe, runs thus: 

 "And the United States hereby renounce, forever, any lib- 

 erty heretofore enjoyed or claimed by the inhabitants 

 thereof, to take, dry or cure fish on, or within three ma- 



