52 CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN. 



10. In the case of British fishing-vessels, Great Britain has power 

 to control the extent to which foreigners can take part in her coast 

 fisheries, but in the case of American vessels, if the contention of the 

 United States were to succeed, she would have no such power. His 

 Majesty's Government submit that the treaty ought not to be so con- 

 strued as to enable the United States to extend, indefinitely, the num- 

 ber of the persons who can exercise the liberties conferred by it in 

 British waters and on British soil. 



11. For these reasons it is submitted that persons other than 

 inhabitants of the United States cannot be regarded as within the 

 terms of the treaty, and that the rights conferred by article one with 

 regard to fishing, and the drying and curing of fish, are confined to 

 American fishermen. 



BRITISH CONTROL OVER BRITISH SUBJECTS. 



12. But, apart from the general question as to the employment of 



foreigners, it is submitted that the right of the British and 

 59 Colonial legislatures to prevent the employment of British 



subjects by Americans upon these fisheries is absolutely indis- 

 putable. The inhabitants of Newfoundland, or of any British 

 colony, are subject to the legislation of that colony, and of the 

 Imperial Parliament. It is within the competency of the legislature 

 to which they are subject to forbid them to engage in any such 

 industry. The treaty contains no expressions from which it can be 

 inferred that His Majesty's Government parted with its control over 

 its own subjects. The United States appear to contend that inhab- 

 itants of Newfoundland, for example, may disregard any enactments 

 of the colonial legislature prohibiting their taking employment in 

 American fishing-vessels, and that any such prohibition is a breach 

 of the treaty. His Majesty's Government refrains at this stage from 

 any detailed discussion of this contention. Although it has been 

 advanced in the course of the correspondence to which reference has 

 been made, it is difficult to anticipate on what grounds such contention 

 can be supported, and His Majesty's Government therefore will 

 reserve further discussion of the point until they are in possession of 

 the case of the United States. 



CONCLUSION. 



For these reasons His Majesty's Government contends: 



(1) That article one means what in terms it says, and that it con- 

 fers the liberty to take fish on the inhabitants of the United States, 

 and not on the inhabitants of other countries. 



(2) That the colonial legislatures and the Imperial Parliament 

 retain the power of prohibiting any of His Majesty's subjects from 

 engaging as fishermen in American vessels, and that the exercise of 

 this power is in no way inconsistent with the treaty. 



