24 COUNTER CASE OF THE UNITED STATES. 



subject in 1815, and presumably Lord Granville had the same thing 

 in mind when he was considering from 1880 to 1883 the question of 

 joint regulations and policing on the treaty coasts under the treaty of 

 1871. 



In this connection, attention is called to the position taken by the 

 Earl of Derby in his letter of June 12, 1884, to the Governor of New- 

 foundland in which he says : 



The peculiar fisheries rights granted by Treaties to the French in 

 Newfoundland invests those waters during the months of the year 

 when fishing is carried on in them, both by English and French "fish- 

 ermen, with a character somewhat analogous to that of a common 

 sea for the purpose of fishery. 



It will be remembered that Mr. Root cites this statement in his 

 letter of instructions to the American ambassador at London, dated 

 June 30, 1906, 6 and says with reference to it : "And the same observa- 

 tion is applicable to the situation created by the existence of Ameri- 

 can fishing rights under the Treaty of 1818." 



Attention is called also to the statement made by Lord Knutsford 

 in his letter of May 31, 1889, to Sir T. O'Brien, Governor of New- 

 foundland, as follows : 



Her Majesty's Government is of opinion that there is no reasonable 

 ground on which the Government of Newfoundland can object to 

 the introduction into that Colony of Regulations similar to those 

 which the Governments interested in the North Sea fisheries have 

 agreed upon as best calculated to insure proper police and to prevent 

 the occurrence of disputes among rival fishermen. 



The situation under the treaties of 1854 an d 1871. 



It appears from the evidence above reviewed, that Great Britain 

 never attempted to exercise or even to assert any right to regulate 

 the liberty of the French fishermen to take fish on their treaty coasts 

 under the French treaty of 1783 without the consent of France ; and 

 it has been shown that, owing to the identical character of the French 

 and the American liberties of taking fish under their respective treaties 

 of 1783 and 1818, there was no more reason for Great Britain to claim 

 a right to impose such regulations in the case of the American fish- 

 ermen than in the case of the French fishermen in the waters of their 

 respective treaty coasts. It has also been shown that no attempt was 



U. S. Case, pp. 33, 176. U. S. Counter-Case Appendix, p. 325. 



" U. S. Case, p. 224. 



