1050 NORTH ATLANTIC COAST FISHERIES ARBITRATION. 



statement that article 25 of the Jay Treaty of 1794 expired by virtue 

 of the limitations of the treaty in 1807. 



If the Tribunal please, this is an important fact. When I say that 

 article 25 of the treaty expired, I should say that all the articles ex- 

 cept the first ten articles and the twelfth article expired in October 

 1807 by virtue of the limitation expressed in the treaty itself. This 

 appears from the fact that all the articles except the first ten and 

 the twelfth were to expire twelve years after the ratifications, which 

 were exchanged the 28th October, 1795. 



Article 25 of the Jay Treaty was about to expire, then, when the 

 Commissioners met in 1806. The object of the negotiation in 1806 

 was to negotiate a new treaty of commerce and navigation between 

 the United States and Great Britain. 



James Monroe, afterwards President of the United States, and 

 William Pinkney, a distinguished lawyer of his time, were the Com- 

 missioners on behalf of the United States, and Lord Holland and 

 Lord Auckland were the Commissioners on behalf of Great Britain. 



These Commissioners, on the 31st December, 1806, concluded a 

 treaty in London, which was rejected by the United States on the 

 ground, as stated by Mr. Madison, then Secretary of State for 

 632 the United States, in an instruction to the American Commis- 

 sioners, after the transmission to him of the treaty, and when 

 returning it to the Commissioners, which appears on p. 100 of the 

 Appendix to the Counter-Case of the United States, that : 



"Without a provision against impressments, substantially such as 

 is contemplated in your original instruction, no treaty is to be con- 

 cluded." 



The United States, the Tribunal will recall, was seeking among 

 other objects a means, by treaty or otherwise, to keep Great Britain 

 from impressing American seamen for the purpose of using them in 

 the European wars. I am not going to digress further to explain 

 that feature of the negotiations. 



If the Tribunal will do me the honour of turning to p. 22 of the 

 Appendix to the Counter-Case of the United States, it will be seen 

 that the first article of this unratified treaty material to the Question 

 now under consideration is article 12. This article is as follows : 



"And whereas it is expedient to make special provisions respecting 

 the maritime jurisdiction of the high contracting parties on the coast 

 of their respective possessions in North America on account of pecul- 

 iar circumstances belonging to those coasts, it is agreed that in all 

 cases where one of the said high contracting parties shall be engaged 

 in war, and the other shall be at peace, the belligerent Power shall 

 not stop except for the purpose hereafter mentioned, the vessels of 

 the neutral Power, or the unarmed vessels of other nations, within five 

 marine miles from the shore belonging to the said neutral Power on 

 the American seas." 



