85 
eer Undoubtedly the French have a right to catch 
fishes upon the coasts of Newfoundland over which they 
we fishery rights, to be used as bait in their fishery upon 
the said coasts, just as they have a right to cut wood 
for the construction of their stages and huts, for to do so 
"is a necessity to the conduct of the fishery in the method 
-which obtained prior to 1783. But, on the other hand, the 
French have no more right to take these bait fishes for use 
nthe Bank fishery than they would have to take wood from 
Newfoundland to erect stages and huts in St. Pierre and Miquelon. 
: As a necessity to that taking of fish (cod) permitted by the 
eaties, the taking of bait fishes is also permissible to the 
‘rench under the treaties; and as a necessity to that drying of 
fish permitted by the treaties the cutting of wood is also per- 
“mitted to thém under the treaties; but as a necessity to a 
taking of fish in places not included under the treaties, and 
contemplated by them, the taking of bait fishes should 
be permitted any more readily than the cutting of wood 
9 construct flakes and huts for a drying of fish in places not 
fholuded under the treaties, and not contemplated by them. 
i ould Newfoundland be expected to allow the French to 
‘cut wood upon its coasts, to erect flakes and huts in St. Pierre 
for the purposes of the Bank fishery, solely because the French 
have under the treaties a right to cut wood in Newfound- 
land to erect flakes and huts upon its own coast for the 
_ purposes of the fishery there? Assuredly not; and if not, 
why should a similar thing be expected of N ewfoundiand as 
- regards her invaluable bait fishes? The French right of fishery 
"upon the coasts of Newfoundland should be treated as a thing by 
itself apart, and as sufficient of itself to itself, not as a source 
of supplies by which the French are aided to compete with 
the people of the country from whose waters the supplies so 
used are drawn, and to whose people, thus competed with, 
_ those supplies would have wholly belonged but for concessions 
Wisjudiciously made to the French a century and a half ago. 
_ Suppose, for argument’s sake, that the French possessed 
an exclusive right of fishery upon the Banks, and, while 
‘refusing to the people of Newfoundland the privilege of par- 
_ ticipating i in it, were to claim and exercise as they do now the 
ght to take bait in Newfoundland waters, to carry on that 
