QUESTION THREE. 57 



the United States on this subject was clearly understood and cor- 

 rectly stated by Sir Edward Grey in his correspondence with Mr. 

 Root, as appears from the following extract taken from his memo- 

 randum of February 2, 1906, which is quoted in the British Case: 



This is the first time, His Majesty's Government are informed, 

 that American vessels have refused to pay these dues, and it is pre- 

 sumed that the refusal is based on the denial by the Colonial Govern- 

 ment of the trading privileges allowed in past years." 



The subject of the treatment of American fishing vessels, when 

 enjoying commercial privileges on the treaty coasts, may, therefore, 

 be eliminated from the discussion of this Question, and with it prac- 

 tically all of the evidence presented in the British Case in support 

 of its contentions must also be eliminated. This evidence consists 

 of certain statutes of Great Britain and its Colonies and of the United 

 States relating to the treatment of foreign trading vessels having no 

 treaty right to enter the territorial waters of those countries, and, 

 therefore, is irrelevant and immaterial as applied to the fishing ves- 

 sels of the United States which are not engaged in trade, but have a 

 treaty right to enter the waters of the treaty coasts for fishing 

 purposes. 



The only statute cited in the British Case which deals specifically 

 with entering or reporting fishing vessels at custom-houses is the 

 British Act of 1775 (15 Geo. Ill, Cap. 31), %vhich provides that such 

 vessels 



shall not be liable to any restraint or regulation with respect to 

 days or hours of working, nor to make any entry at the custom- 

 house of Newfoundland, except a report to be made by the master on 

 his first arrival there, and at his clearing out from thence; and that 

 a fee not exceeding 2s 6d shall and may be taken by the officers of the 

 customs at Newfoundland for each such report; and that no other 

 fee shall be taken or demanded by any officer of the customs there 

 upon any other pretence whatsoever relative to the said fishery, any 

 law, custom or usage to the contrary notwithstanding. 6 



But even in this case it appears that by sections V and VI of this 

 act, the fishing vessels referred to were at liberty to engage in trading, 

 being authorized to import provisions into Newfoundland. Further- 

 more, it must be borne in mind that the fishing vessels referred to 

 were not resorting to Newfoundland waters in the exercise of a 

 treaty right, as in the case of the American vessels under the treaty 



British Case, p. 62. > British Case, p. 65. British Case, pp. 64 and 65. 

 92909 S. Doc. 870, 61-3, vol 6 5 



