396 NEW ENGLAND FISHERIES 



and further, refused to insert the words also proposed by 

 Mr. ADAMS " continued to enjoy' -in the second branch 

 of Art. Ill of the Treaty of 1783 ; 



(b) That the Treaty of 1818 was in different terms, 

 and very different in extent, from that 1783, and was 

 made for different considerations. It was, in other words, 

 a new grant. 



For the purpose of such proof it is further contended 

 by the United States : 



(6) That as contemporary Commercial Treaties contain 

 express provisions for submitting foreigners to 

 local legislation, and the Treaty of 1818 contains 

 no such provision, it should be held, a contrario, 

 that inhabitants of the United States exercising 

 these liberties are exempt from regulation. 



The Tribunal is unable to agree with this contention: 

 (a) Because the Commercial Treaties contemplated did 

 not admit foreigners to all and equal rights, seeing that 

 local legislation excluded them from many rights of im- 

 portance, e.g. that of holding land ; and the purport of the 

 provisions in question consequently was to preserve these 

 discriminations. But no such discriminations existing in 

 the common enjoyment of the fishery by American and 

 British fishermen, no such provision was required; 



(&) Because no proof is furnished of similar exemptions 

 of foreigners from local legislation in default of Treaty 

 stipulations subjecting them thereto ; 



(c) Because no such express provision for subjection of 

 the nationals of either Party to local law was made either 

 in this Treaty, in respect to their reciprocal admission to 

 certain territories as agreed in Art. Ill, or in Art. Ill of 

 the Treaty of 1794; although such subjection was clearly 

 contemplated by the Parties. 



