986 NORTH ATLANTIC COAST FISHERIES ARBITRATION. 



I will call attention to the concluding paragraph of this part of 

 the Report: 



" It will also be perceived that we insisted on the clause by which 

 the United States renounce their right to the fisheries relinquished by 

 the Convention, that clause having been omitted in the first British 

 counter-projet. We insisted on it with the view 1st. Of prevent- 

 ing any implication that the fisheries secured to use were a new grant, 

 and of placing the permanence of the rights secured and of those 

 renounced precisely on the same footing. 2d. Of its being expressly 

 stated that our renunciation extended only to the distance of three 

 miles from the coasts. This last point was the more important, as, 

 with the exception of the fishery in open boats within certain har- 

 bors, it appeared, from the communications above mentioned, that the 

 fishing-ground on the whole coast of Nova Scotia, is more than three 

 miles from the shores ; " 



This was their justification when it became a question of their 

 having given up a fishery on the coast of Nova Scotia which they 

 had previously enjoyed. They had the privilege, before that, on 

 other parts of the coasts of Newfoundland, and British North 

 America, and in renouncing and giving up those they thought they 

 were justified, because the fisheries on the coast of Nova Scotia, which 

 they were giving up, they thought, were all 3 miles outside of the 

 coast line. 



" Whilst, on the contrary, it is almost universally close to the shore 

 on the coasts of Labrador. It is in that point of view that the priv- 

 ilege of entering the ports for shelter is useful, and it is hoped that, 

 with that provision, a considerable portion of the actual fisheries on 

 that coast (of Nova Scotia) will, notwithstanding the renunciation, 

 be preserved." 



That is, having the right to enter into the non-treaty coast in 

 Nova Scotia for the purposes of shelter, they would still be able to 

 avail themselves of the fishery on that coast, although 3 miles outside 

 of the coast line. 



Now, in confirmation of that Report, I would call the attention of 

 the Tribunal to p. 130 of the British Case Appendix a despatch 

 from the Right Honourable Viscount Falkland to the Right Hon- 

 ourable Lord John Russell, 8th May, 1841. I shall not read that. 

 It is a long document, but at the end on p. 130 it says : 



" The Plenipotentiaries however acted on bad information," 

 The subject-matter under discussion was a dispute as to whether 

 they had given up the fishery on the coast of Nova Scotia. After dis- 

 posing of that question, which was very long and tedious, as a matter 

 of history, this part comes in : 



" The Plenipotentiaries however acted on bad information, and 

 were mistaken, beyond three miles from the land, very few, if any 

 herring or mackerel, the chief objects of pursuit are to be caught, 



