104 CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN. 



shot, as cruising ground for belligerent purposes. In 1793 our Gov- 

 ernment thought they were entitled in reason to as broad a margin of 

 protected navigation as any nation whatever, though at that time 

 they did not positively insist beyond the distance of a marine league 

 from the sea-shores; and, in 1806, our Government thought it would 

 not be unreasonable, considering the extent of the United States, the 

 shoalness of their coast, and the natural indication furnished by the 

 well-defined path of the Gulf Stream, to expect an immunity from 

 belligerent warfare for the space between that limit and the American 

 shore. It ought at least to be insisted that the extent of the neutral 

 immunity should correspond with the claims maintained by Great 

 Britain around her own territory, and that no belligerent right 

 should be exercised within " the chambers formed by headlands, or 

 anywhere at sea within the distance of four leagues, or from a right 

 line from one headland to another." 



Wheaton, in 1836, treats the matter in the same way : 



117 The maritime territory of every State extends to the ports, 

 harbours, bays, mouths of rivers, and adjacent parts of the 

 sea enclosed by headlands belonging to the same State. The general 

 usage of nations superadds to this extent of territorial jurisdiction a 

 distance of a marine league, or as far as a cannon-shot will reach 

 from the shore, along all the coasts of the State. Within these limits 

 its rights of property and territorial jurisdiction are absolute, and 

 exclude those of every other nation. 



Halleck uses almost identical language in affirming a State's right 

 of property to inlets enclosed between headlands. 6 



A recent American writer, Hannis Taylor, sums up the position as 

 follows : 



In the absence of any generally acknowledged standard as to their 

 size and conformation, it is difficult to determine in any given case 

 whether or no a bay, gulf, or recess in a coast-line can be justly re- 

 garded as territorial water .... Germany and France are inclined 

 to limit their claims to such bays, gulfs, and recesses as are not more 

 than 10 miles wide at their entrance, measured in a straight line from 

 headland to headland. The latter claims, however, the whole of the 

 oyster beds in the Bay of Cancale, the entrance to which is 17 miles 

 wide, the cultivation of such beds by local French fishermen making 

 the case exceptional. At an earlier day the United States was in- 

 clined to claim dominion over a wide extent of the adjacent ocean. 

 " Considering," says Chancellor Kent, " the great extent of the line 

 of the American coasts, we have a right to claim for fiscal and de- 

 fensive regulations a liberal extension of maritime jurisdiction; and 

 it would not be unreasonable, as I apprehend, to assume for domestic 

 purposes connected with our safety and welfare the control of waters 

 on our coasts, though included within lines stretching from quite 

 distant headlands as, for instance, from Cape Ann to Cape Cod, 

 and from Xantucket to Montauk Point, and from that point to the 



"Elements of Int. Law (4th ed.), 1904, sec. 177, pp. 275-6. 



6 Ed. Baker, 1908, vol. i., p. 167. 



International Public Law, s. 229, p. 278. 



