310 APPENDIX TO BRITISH COTJNTEB CASE. 



except in one single instance, when a witness did give the name of 

 the Sarah C. Pyle as a vessel that had fished for halibut in the 

 vicinity of Cape Sable. We have an affidavit from the captain of 

 that schooner, Benjamin Swim, saying that he did not take any fish 

 within many miles of Cape Sable. He says he has been engaged 

 in cod-fishing since April of this year, and "has landed 150,000 

 pounds of halibut, and caught them all, both codfish and halibut, 

 on Western Banks. The nearest to the shore that I have caught 

 fish of any kind this year is, at least, 40 miles." (Affidavit No. 242.) 



So much for the inshore halibut fishery. I will, however, before 

 leaving it, refer to the statement of one British witness, Thomas 

 R. Pattilo, who testified that occasionally halibut may be caught 

 inshore, as a boy may catch a codfish off the rocks; but, pursued as 

 a business, halibut are caught in the sea, in deep water. " How deep 

 do you say ? " " The fishing is most successfully prosecuted in about 

 90 fathoms of water, and, later in the season, in as much as 150 

 fathoms." 



So much for the inshore halibut fishery ; and that brings me to the 

 inshore cod fishery, as to which I am reminded of a chapter in an old 

 history of Ireland that was entitled " On Snakes in Ireland ", and 

 the whole chapter was " There are no Snakes in Ireland." So there 

 is no inshore cod fishery pursued as a business by United States 

 vessels anywhere. It is, like halibut-fishing, exclusively a deep-sea 

 fishing. They caught a whale the other day in the harbor of Char- 

 lottetown, but I do not suppose our friends expect you to assess in this 

 award against the United States any particular sum for the inshore 

 whale fishery. There is no cod fishery or halibut fishery inshore, pur- 

 sued by our vessels, any more than there is inshore whale fishery. We 

 know and our witnesses know where our vessels go. If they go near the 

 British shores at all they go to buy bait, and leave their money in 

 payment for the bait. Will it be said that the cod fishery is indi- 

 rectly to be paid for, because fresh bait must be used, and the cod 

 fishery cannot profitably be pursued without fresh bait; and because 

 we are hereafter to be deprived of the right to buy bait by laws ex- 

 pected to be passed, and then shall have to stop and catch it, so that 

 by and by, when some new statutes have been enacted, and we have been 

 cut off from commercial privileges, we may be forced to catch bait 

 for cod-fishing in British territorial waters? I think it will be time 

 enough to meet that question when it arises. Any attempt to cut us 

 off from the commercial privileges that are allowed in times of peace 

 by the comity of civilized nations to all at peace with them, would 

 of course be adjusted between the two governments in the spirit that 

 becomes two imperial and Christian powers. I do not think that, 

 looking forward to some unknown time when some unknown law will 

 be passed, we need anticipate that we are to be cut off from the privi- 

 lege of buying bait, and therefore you should award compensation 

 r gainst us for the bait which we may at that time find occasion our- 

 selves to catch. But if it is worth while to spend a single moment 

 upon that, how thoroughly it has been disposed of by the evidence, 

 which shows that this practice of going from the fishing grounds on 

 the Banks into harbors to purchase bait is one attended with great 

 loss of time, and with other incidental disadvantages, so that the 

 owners of the vessels much prefer to have their fishermen stay on the 



