ORAL ARGUMENT OF SIR RICHARD WEBSTER, Q. C. M. P. 547 



the war of 1812; and, ^yllen the TJnited States came to negotiate for 

 fresh privileges luuler the Treaty of 1818, they acted in accordance with 

 the recognized law of nations.. 



Lord Hannen.— Was it 1818? 



Sir Richard Webster. — 1818 was the date. The actual Treaty of 

 Peace was in 1815; the Treaty of the fisheries was in 1818. When the 

 United States came to negotiate with regard to fresh liberties within 

 the territorial waters, or in other words to get a substitute for tliat 

 Avhich they only got by the Treaty of 1783, they insisted on getting it 

 by Treaty and they got it by Treaty; but did they either ask or get any 

 fresh grant of the right to lish upon the Grand Banks of Newfoundland, 

 and on all the other banks of Newfoundhind? They did nothing of the 

 kind. 



The question was never raised or suggested — I will show it in writing 

 in a moment — after 1783, that the United States had that right as a 

 nation. Why, Sir, there was one case in the year 1818. It is referred 

 to at page 91 also of the 2nd volume of Lyman, where a vessel having 

 been seized about six miles off the coast, the British Government re]m- 

 diated the act — would not have anything to do with it; and it is the 

 fact that diplomatically, openly, and without the slightest reserve Great 

 Britain after 1783, has recognized the right of the United States to fish 

 on those banks — the right as a nation by without regard to any grant 

 by Great Britain. There cannot be a stronger instance or argument in 

 support of my contention in opposition to that of my learned friend 

 Mr. Phelps than to point out that if it were true that they got the right 

 of fishing on the Grand Bank by the Treaty of 1783, they would have 

 had to get a renewal of that Treaty after the war of 1812, and not only 

 did they not get it, but never even asked for it. Why not? Because 

 it was openly stated that Great Britain recognized that right to tish as 

 being the right of a nation to fish, quite independently of any grant or 

 right by Treaty. In fact, Mr. President, the Treaty of 1783 is an instance 

 by anticipation of what occurred in 1821 and 1825; in 1824 and 1825, 

 Kussia having made a claim to interfere with rights of navigation in 

 fishing on the high seas, withdrew those claims and acknowledged they 

 were withdrawn by the first articles of the Treaties of 1824 and 1825. 

 Forty years before, in the year 1783, the United States, fearing that 

 there might be some impediment or claim against their right, got inserted 

 the words in the Treaty that the United States should continue to enjoy 

 unmolested the right. The case is identically parallel. 



But now. Sir, I have stated that Great Britain never insisted upon 

 the position that the United States had this right of fishing upon the 

 Banks by virtue of the Treaty of 1783 or otherwise than as a nation. I 

 refer again to the commission which was given to the representatives 

 of Great Britain under date the 28th July 1814 for the purpose of nego- 

 tiating the Treaty of 1818. It was read by Sir Charles Kussell. You 

 will find it at page 1111 of the unrevised Eeport of the 28th day : 



You will observe that the Srd Article of the Treaty consists of two distinct 

 brauches. The lirst which relates to the open sea lisheries we consider of perma- 

 nent obligation, being a recognition of the general right which all nations have to 

 frequent and take tish on the high seas. The latter branch is, on the contrary, con- 

 sidered as a mere conventional arrangement between two (States, and as such it has 

 been annulled by the war. 



But as my learned friend Mr. Phelps says — and he will forgive me, I 

 am sure if for the necessities of my argument I must once more read 

 this extraordinary language: 



It never occurred to the United States Government or its eminent representatives 

 to claim, far less to the British Goverumeut to coucedOj either in 1783 or in 1815 tUat 

 tliese tisheries were general property. 



