1022 NORTH ATLANTIC COAST FISHERIES ARBITRATION. 



specifically designated in the treaty, the United States renounced, by 

 this renunciatory clause, the right of fishing in the open sea. 



I had also stated the position of the United States as to the true 

 construction of this clause of the treaty of 1818. I shall of course 

 not again state those positions, but will proceed to draw the conclu- 

 sions resulting therefrom. 



The evident result of the position taken by counsel for Great 

 Britain in this arbitration is that it avoids an examination into and a 

 discussion of the negotiations preceding the treaty of 1818, and the 

 conclusons that irresistibly emerge therefrom. 



While a passing claim of jurisdiction is inserted in the printed 

 Argument of Great Britain, and in passing is reverted to by counsel, 

 nevertheless the statement in the Argument of Great Britain is that 

 it is immaterial for this Tribunal to make any examination into the 

 question of the extent of exclusive maritime jurisdiction over the 

 waters in the Xorth Atlantic Ocean bordering the British possessions. 



I respectfully submit that the position of the Government of Great 

 Britain has not been in the past to lay claim as against the fishermen 

 of the United States to any part of the high seas; disregarding, of 

 course, now the right of Great Britain to the triangular shaped 

 bodies of water concerning which there was so much discussion at 

 the last session of the Tribunal. 



I may here observe, Mr. President, that at the last session I stated 

 that charts, showing the result of the position of the United States, 

 would be submitted to this Tribunal. If the Tribunal will pardon 

 me, I will not take those charts up during this session, although they 

 are here, because when I come to a later portion of my argument it 

 will be necessary for me to compare from those charts the posi- 

 615 tion of the United States, and the ease with which its principle 

 can be carried into force by a decision of this Tribunal, with 

 the position of the counsel for Great Britain, and the impossibility 

 of grounding the award of this Tribunal upon that position. I de- 

 sire, therefore, not to cover the same ground twice, and shall pass on. 



It is perhaps because the views which I am now about to bring to 

 the attention of the Tribunal have been expressed at various times on 

 behalf of the Government of Great Britain, that their position re- 

 garding their rights in the North Atlantic Ocean on this question of 

 the extent of territorial waters has never been enforced against the 

 fishing- vessels of the United States. 



In the British Case, on p. 103, this statement appears: 



" Since 1888 the question has not been further discussed." 



That refers to this question, because in that portion of the Argu- 

 ment of Great Britain counsel are discussing solely Question 5 - 

 " bays " as appears manifestly from the Argument itself. 



