DESPATCHES, REPORTS, CORRESPONDENCE, ETC. 361 



I contend, therefore, that the governments, in adopting the lan- 

 guage of the treaty of 1783 in the treaty of 1818, received the words 

 with the construction and application given to them up to that time, 

 and that neither party can now deny such construction and applica- 

 tion, but is irrevocably bound by it. 



There are other portions of the article in question that aid in giv- 

 ing a construction to the clause under consideration, and that irre- 

 sistably sustain the view I have adopted. 



Thus it is provided, in another portion of the same article, in refer- 

 ence to these same creeks and bays, that the fishermen of the United 

 States shall be admitted to enter " such bays " for the purpose of 

 shelter and to obtain wood and water; thus clearly implying that 

 such bays are small indentations, extending into the land, to which 

 fishing craft would naturally resort for shelter, and to obtain wood 



and water, and not large, open seas like the Bay of Fundy. 

 215 There are numerous bays of this character along the coast, 

 within the Bay of Fundy, such as the Bay of Passamaquoddy, 

 Annapolis, St. Mary's, Chignecto, Mines bay, and other well known 

 bays extending up into the land. 



There is a further argument to sustain the American construction 

 given to the treaty, derived from the meaning affixed to the term 

 " coasts,' 1 as applied by the usage of the country, and which was 

 adopted and embodied in the various treaties between France and 

 England from a very early period, and has been continued down to 

 the present time. 



I have not seen this argument adverted to; but it seems to me 

 important, and, indeed, of itself quite conclusive as to the matter 

 in question, and I shall now consider it. 



The term " coasts," in all these prior treaties, is applied to all the 

 borders and shores of the eastern waters, not only along the main- 

 land, but in and about the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and around all the 

 larger and smaller islands where fisheries were carried on. 



These coasts are thus defined and specified in the treaty of Utrecht 

 between Great Britain and France in 1713, of Paris in 1763, and other 

 treaties to the present time. In the treaty of Utrecht, between France 

 and England, the liberty of taking and drying fish is allowed " on 

 the coasts of Newfoundland"; provision is also made as to the fisheries 

 on the coasts, in the mouth, and in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. 



Reference is also made to these " coasts " in the same manner in the 

 treaty of Paris, which took place after the conquest of Canada. The 

 French are permitted by this treat} 7 to fish in the Gulf of St. Law- 

 rence at a given distance from all '''the coasts" belonging to Great 

 Britain, as well as those "of the continent" as those of the islands 

 situated in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. The fishery also "on the 

 coasts " of the comparatively small island " of Cape Breton out of 

 said Gulf" is regulated and provided for; and further, it is provided 

 "that the fishery on the coasts of Nova Scotia or Acaclia, and every- 

 where else out of the said Gulf, shall remain on the footing of former 

 treaties." 



Now I regard it as utterly impossible for any one looking at these 

 treaties, with the map of the islands and waters in the Gulf or Bay of 

 St. Lawrence, and in and around Nova Scotia, referred to in these 

 treaties, to doubt for a moment that the term " coasts " was designed 

 to apply, and did, in terms, apply to the whole contour of the main- 



