ARGUMENT OF SIR JAMES WINTER. 955 



ing of mackerel taken by means of these seines on any part of the 

 coast of the United States, before the first of June in each year. As 

 by this date many of these migratory fish had found their way to 

 the coast of Nova Scotia and the Gulf of St. Lawrence, it will readily 

 be seen that had the fish been at all plenty in the waters named, the 

 seining operations of the United States vessels would, to a very much 

 larger extent than was done, have been there carried on all such 

 vessels being provided with purse seines." 



The reason, as I am instructed it is a public matter, and, of 

 course, there will be no question about it that this Act was passed 

 by the United States Congress in this form was that the catching 

 of fish itself and the method of catching it was a matter for the 

 Legislature of each particular State, and, seeing that the legislation 

 of the particular States concerned had not prevented the use 

 572 of purse seines, for reasons, which, no doubt, commended them 

 to those States, the Federal Legislature, realising the disas- 

 trous consequences, and apparently taking a different view of it from 

 that of the several States, accomplished the object, not by prohibit- 

 ing the catching of mackerel, but by prohibiting the landing of 

 mackerel taken by means of purse seines on any part of the coasts 

 of the United States before the 1st June in each year. We must 

 therefore claim, not only that these purse seines are mischievous and 

 bad in their effects, but we must also claim, on behalf of Great Britain 

 and the colonies, the right to control the fisheries of Newfoundland 

 and Canada in such a manner as to prevent these destructive prac- 

 tices and to preserve these fisheries. Of course this question, under 

 Question 1, is one for the consideration of the Tribunal as to whether 

 or not we have the power to legislate in such matters. I would make 

 this further observation upon this general matter, that there has 

 never been any desire to refuse to entertain any objection that the 

 United States may have to any of the laws~ or regulations in force 

 in Newfoundland in relation to the fisheries in so far as they affect 

 the operations of United States fishermen. There has never been 

 any complaint or objection upon these matters, or, if there has, there 

 has never been any refusal, and there never will be any refusal, to 

 hear, to consider, and to entertain any objection that may be put 

 forward. There is no interest on the part of Newfoundland, no 

 object,- no purpose to be served by any refusal to consider any ob- 

 jection that may be made with the view of the protection of the 

 fisheries on the one side, or the repeal of any restriction on the other 

 side if it should be found to be unnecessary or working harshly or 

 injuriously, or creating difficulties for United States fishermen, 



I have now, Mr. President, disposed, in so far as I am concerned, 

 of this question of the regulations and legislation of Newfoundland ; 

 and I would ask the attention of the Tribunal to a few observations 



