100 COUNTER CASE OP THE UNITED STATES. 



is exclusive (which, as has been said, must be practically the case) 

 the Americans could acquire no right, under this convention of 1818, 

 during- the period of the year occupied by the French fishery, and it 

 is believed that in point of fact no claim to interfere with the French 

 has ever been sustained by Americans; nevertheless Her Majesty's 

 Government are of opinion, in order to preserve consistency with the 

 language of the convention of 1818. it was necessary to declare the 

 French right on points between Cape Ray and the Quirpons to be 

 exclusive " against British subjects, in order to leave no semblance 

 of interference with nominal (although not in fact exerciseable) 

 rights on the part of the United States. It is very unnecessary to do 

 more than refer you to the more recent fishing treaty with the United 

 States of 1854, as it does not appear to affect the question now 

 before us. a 



So far as this treaty and Mr. Labouchere's explanation of the pur- 

 pose of the language employed relate to the use of the harbors on the 

 west coast of Newfoundland for fishing purposes, they furnish a 

 distinct admission that the American treaty coast under the treaty 

 of 1818 included the bays and harbors on that coast. In this con- 

 nection attention is called particularly to Mr. Labouchere's statement 

 at the end of the extract quoted, that the treaty of 1854 with the 

 United States " does not appear to affect the question now before us." 

 This statement, it will be perceived, necessarily implies that the bays 

 and harbors referred to were included in the American treaty coast 

 under the treaty of 1818, for otherwise, under the provisions of the 

 treaty of 1854 admitting American fishermen to all the bays and 

 harbors of Newfoundland not included in the treaty coast defined by 

 the treaty of 1818, the treaty of 1854 would have directly affected the 

 question then before Mr. Labouchere. 



As has been shown by the evidence already presented, Mr. La- 

 bouchere's assumption, that the American fishing rights in the har- 

 bors on the west coast of Newfoundland were " not in fact exercis- 

 able," was not founded on fact, and his statement to that effect must 

 be attributed to the" necessity he was under of making some explana- 

 tion to excuse the discrimination against Newfoundland fishermen 

 under this treaty with France, by which the French were given fish- 

 ing rights in certain harbors to the exclusion of the British fisher- 

 men, leaving the American fishermen undisturbed. It is unnecessary, 

 however, to consider Mr. Labouchere's views on this point, for, as 

 hereinbefore stated, that treaty was never put into operation, and 

 subsequently the treaty of 1904 between Great Britain and France 



U. S. Counter-Case Appendix, p. 253. 



