OPINIONS OF KECENT PUBLICISTS 691 







mainly because it was the one which was usually recognised by 

 international usage. But the preponderating opinion of Con- 

 tinental publicists favoured a more extended boundary, in view 

 more particularly of the right of fishery, the distances proposed 

 varying from five to ten miles from low- water mark ; x and 

 Professor Auber, of Christiania, advocated the extension of 

 jurisdiction with respect to fisheries beyond the limit fixed for 

 the territorial sea, to apply equally to subjects and foreigners, 

 each state assigning boundaries for such jurisdiction, either 

 itself or by convention between the Powers interested, and a 

 similar proposal was made by the Canadian representative, who 

 suggested that the jurisdictional zone should extend to nine 

 miles. Owing to these opinions, and also to the report of the 

 Sea Fisheries Committee of the House of Commons in 1893, 

 presided over by Mr Marjoribanks (the late Lord Tweedmouth), 

 which proposed an extension of the territorial waters in the 

 interests of the fisheries, 2 the three-mile limit was abandoned, 

 and one of six miles from low- water mark recommended instead. 

 This particular distance was selected in order to secure a limit 

 which would correspond to that of Spain and the Scandinavian 

 Powers, and thus make the practice in all European countries 

 more uniform. 



With regard to bays, the draft proposal was at first to adopt 

 a base-line of six miles from headland to headland, and after- 

 wards one of ten miles, as in the fishery conventions, was 

 proposed. The Institut finally adopted a base-line of twelve 

 miles i.e., double the width of the territorial zone, but the 

 International Law Association preferred the old limit of ten 

 miles. The Scandinavian publicists were of opinion that these 

 limits were too small, and that instead of having a fixed and 

 rigid rule for the delimitation of bays, each state should be 

 permitted to fix the boundaries according to the local configur- 

 ation of the coast and the local requirements. While this 

 suggestion was not accepted, it was admitted that certain 



1 Most of the English members who expressed their opinion, as Sir Travers 

 Twiss, Professor Holland, and Mr Moore, preferred to retain the limit at three 

 miles ; Professor Westlake favoured five miles. 



2 Report from the Select Committee on Sea Fisheries, 1893 ; Seventeenth Rep., 

 International Law Assoc., p. 103, 1896 ; Annuaire de V Institut de Droit Inter- 

 national, xiii. 



