44 CASE OF GEE AT BEITAIN. 



which they formerly enjoyed as subjects of the British Crown, and 

 their present rights are merely in continuation of those former rights, 

 the rights which they can now assert are not greater than those 

 which they could have maintained in the period before the Declara- 

 tion of Independence; for the contention is that they are the same 

 rights recognised and continued by the two treaties. Now, before 

 the war of Independence it is indisputable that these rights of fishing 

 were subject to control and regulation by the British parliament, 

 which could have prescribed the times, the seasons, and the manner 

 in which the fishing was to be carried on; and any such legislation 

 would have bound the inhabitants of the thirteen colonies, which 

 subsequently became the United States of America, in the same way 

 and to the same extent as it would have been binding upon any other 

 subjects of the British Crown. If, then, the right or liberty of 

 fishing which is enjoyed by the inhabitants of the United States 

 under the treaty of 1818 is the same, in respect of the more limited 

 area defined by the treaty, as the right which they enjoyed as British 

 subjects, that right or liberty is subject to regulation by British 

 legislation. 



CONCLUSION. 



It is therefore submitted on the part of Great Britain that the exer- 

 cise of the liberty conferred by the treaty is subject to reasonable 

 regulation by Great Britain, Canada, and Newfoundland with refer- 

 ence to the various matters mentioned in question No. 1, and that, 

 for the validity of such regulations, the consent of the United States 

 is not necessary. 



