424; NEW ENGLAND FISHERIES 



But the Tribunal is unable to agree with this contention : 

 (a) Because it is a principle of interpretation that words 

 in a document ought not to be considered as being without 

 any meaning if there is not specific evidence to that pur- 

 pose and the interpretation referred to would lead to the 

 consequence, practically, of reading the words ' l bays, coasts 

 and harbours' out of the Treaty; so that it would read 

 "within three miles of any of the coasts" including therein 

 the coasts of the bays and harbours ; 



(6) Because the word "therein' in the proviso "re- 

 strictions necessary to prevent their taking, drying or cur- 

 ing fish therein ' ' can refer only to ' ' bays, ' ' and not to the 

 belt of three miles along the coast; and can be explained 

 only on the supposition that the words "bays, creeks and 

 harbours' are to be understood in their usual ordinary 

 sense and not in an artificially restricted sense of bays 

 within the three mile belt; 



(c) Because the practical distinction for the purpose of 

 this fishery between coasts and bays and the exceptional 

 conditions pertaining to the latter has been shown from the 

 correspondence and the documents in evidence, especially 

 the Treaty of 1783, to have been in all probability present 

 to the minds of the negotiators of the Treaty of 1818 ; 



(d) Because the existence of this distinction is confirmed 

 in the same article of the Treaty by the proviso permitting 

 the United States fishermen to enter bays for certain pur- 

 poses ; 



(e) Because the word " coasts ' : is used in the plural 

 form whereas the contention would require its use in the 

 singular ; 



(/) Because the Tribunal is unable to understand the 

 term "bays' 1 in the renunciatory clause in other than its 

 geographical sense, by which a bay is to be considered as an 

 indentation of the coast, bearing a configuration of a par- 



