ARGUMENT OF CHARLES B. WARREN. 1049 



The statement seems plain. It is that the terms which were used in 

 the negotiations leading to the treaty of 1818 had such a definite 

 meaning that there must have been an understanding between the 

 two Governments as to their exact meaning. 



The review of the diplomatic relations between the two Govern- 

 ments prior to 1815, upon which I am about to enter, will disclose 

 how far Great Britain had defined her exclusive jurisdiction in the 

 waters adjacent to her possessions in North America and will be help- 

 ful in showing the Tribunal what was in the minds of the negotiators 

 of the treaty of 1818, by reason of the negotiations between the two 

 Governments during the years immediately preceding the making of 

 the treaty of 1818. 



This review is made more important because of the incorrect con- 

 clusions drawn in the Case presented in behalf of Great Britain, 

 and by counsel in oral argument here, as to the effect and bearing of 

 these occurrences upon the negotiations in 1818; which conclusions 

 were drawn from certain carefully selected data antedating the period 

 directly under discussion. 



I refer to the reliance placed upon the Treaty of Utrecht of 1713, 

 the treaty between Great Britain, France, and Spain of 1763, the 

 action of the United States as to Delaware Bay in 1793, the letter 

 from Mr. Jefferson to Mr. Genet, the Minister for France in the 

 United States in 1793, the Jay Treaty of 1794, and the letter from 

 Mr. Jefferson, in 1804, to the Secretary to the Treasury. 



This data will be hereafter specifically dealt with, and I do not 

 now stop to make any observations concerning any part of it. 



I will take up now the negotiations between the United States and 

 the Government of Great Britain leading to the unratified treaty of 

 1806. 



From these negotiations two important facts will emerge, and they 

 are these : that by the terms of this unratified treaty of 1806 the mari- 

 time jurisdiction stipulated for by the terms of the treaty was to 

 apply both to the United States and to the Dominions of Great 

 Britain in North America; and that while in these negotiations the 

 United States sought, as against Great Britain, some protection for 

 waters enclosed by what Mr. Monroe called headlands, the Govern- 

 ment of Great Britain absolutely declined to make any such conces- 

 sion, and refused to incorporate it in the treaty. 



Great Britain proceeded along the lines that she had been pursuing, 

 with the history of which we are all familiar, until the outcome was, 

 unfortunately, the war of 1812. 



Taking up the negotiation of this unratified treaty of the 31st De- 

 cember, 1806, I wish to state, first, I do not recall any statement dur- 

 ing the entire argument, and I am unable to find in the report of the 

 argument of counsel who opened on behalf of Great Britain any 



