388 NEW ENGLAND FISHERIES 



The Tribunal is unable to agree with this contention: 



(a) Because although the French right designated in 

 1713 merely * 'an allowance, " (a term of even less force than 

 that used in regard to the American fishery) was neverthe- 

 less converted, in practice, into an exclusive right, this 

 concession on the part of Great Britain was presumably 

 made because France, before 1713, claimed to be the sover- 

 eign of Newfoundland, and, in ceding the Island, had, as the 

 American argument says, ''reserved for the benefit of its 

 subjects the right to fish and to use the strand"; 



(&) Because the distinction between the French and 

 American right is indicated by the different wording of 

 the Statutes for the observance of Treaty obligations to- 

 wards France and the United States, and by the British 

 Declaration of 1783; 



(c) And, also, because this distinction is maintained in 

 the Treaty with France of 1904, concluded at a date when 

 the American claim was approaching its present stage, 

 and by which certain common rights of regulation are 

 recognized to France. 



For the further purpose of such proof it is contended 

 by the United States: 



(2) That the liberties of fishery, being accorded to the 

 inhabitants of the United States "forever,' ac- 

 quire, by being in perpetuity and unilateral, a 

 character exempting them from local legislation. 



The Tribunal is unable to agree with this contention : 

 (a) Because there is no necessary connection between 

 the duration of a grant and its essential status in its re- 

 lation to local regulation; a right granted in perpetuity 

 may yet be subject to regulation, or, granted temporarily, 

 may yet be exempted therefrom; or being reciprocal may 



