ARGUMENT OF GREAT BRITAIN. 47 



Ceylon Pearl Fisheries. 



The poarl fisheries on the banks of Ceylon, which extend caYe p^253^***^* 

 from () to 21 miles from the coast, are subject to the Colonial . i-iliiendix, vol. 

 Act of 1811, which authorizes the seizure and condemnation '• ^'i-tuah coun- 

 of any boat found withiu the limits of the pearl banks, orterC'ise, pp. 93, 

 hovering near them. 



These pearl fisheries have been treated from time imme- 

 morial by the successive rulers of the island as subjects of 

 property and jurisdiction, and have been so regarded with 

 the acquiescence of all other nations. 



The principles governing the occupation of such pearl (Post, -p. 50.) 

 fisheries will be dealt with at a later stage of this Argument; 

 for the ])resent it is sofiicient to indicate the proposition 

 which Great Britain will maintain by a quotation from 



Chief Justice Cockburn, in Eeg. v. Keyn: u.^e^.^"- "^"^ ^^• 



52 Where the sea, oi" the Led ou which it rests, can be physically 



occupied permanently, it may be made subject to occupation in 

 the same manner as unoccupied territoiy. 



The special application of this principle to the Ceylon "Droit nea 

 fisheries was thus treated by Vattel: Geus,"i.8ec.287. 



Who can doubt that the pearl fisheries of Bahrien and Ceylon may 

 lawfully become property? 



Australian Pearl Fisheries. 



In the United States Case reference is thus made to the 

 Australasian fishery laws: 



These Statutes extended the local regulations of the two countries United States 

 mentioned ((Queensland and Western Australia) to defined areas of the Cas(i, p. 2:!4. 

 0]>en sea, of which the most remote points are about 250 miles from j^ pp.'4(i7-409.^*' ' 

 the coast of Queensland, and about 600 miles from the coast of West- ' Biiti.sh Coun- 

 ern Australia. ter-Case, p. 94. 



It suffices to point out that these Statutes are in express 

 terms confined to British ships and boats attached to Brit- 

 ish ships. 



Foreign Fishing Laws discussed. 

 France. 



By the Decree of the 10th May, 1862, certain fisheries are allowed to TTnited States 

 be1jemi)oravily suspended over an extent of sea beyond the o-mile limit Case, p. 234. 

 if it is necessary for the preservation of the bed of the sea, or of a fish- British Couu- 

 ery composed of migratory fislics. The suspension will be ordered on terCase, p.94-95. 

 the request of the "iirud'hommes des pechcurs," or, in their absence, 

 of the ''syndics des gens de mer." 



There is no evidence that this law is applied to for- 

 eigners. 



On the contrary, there is evidence that, apart from Con- 

 ventions, France only legislates for foreign fishermen within 

 the 3-mile limit. 



Article 1 of Law 1 of March 1888 lays down: 



Fi.shing by foreign vessels is forbidden in the territorial waters of 

 Trance and Algeria withiii a limit which is fixed at 3 marine miles to 

 sea from low-water mark. 



