1070 NORTH ATLANTIC COAST FISHERIES ARBITRATION. 



expire in October 1807, and that there was no extension of jurisdic- 

 tion by treaty in 1806. 



It had also appeared that the negotiations betwen the two Powers 

 disclosed that the extent of maritime jurisdiction recognised by 

 Great Britain, in the absence of treaty stipulations or long-continued 

 usage and acquiescence therein, was 3 marine miles from the shore. 



The negotiations for the treaty of 1806 also disclosed that 

 644 there was no recognition of exclusive maritime jurisdiction 

 over large bodies of water adjacent to the coasts of either 

 Power, whenever called bays, and that any special provision, outside 

 of the general clause fixing the extent of maritime jurisdiction, for 

 the protection of harbours or chambers within headlands sought by 

 the United States, was resisted by the Commissioners on behalf of 

 Great Britain, under the terms of an instruction which is not in 

 evidence, and is not produced in behalf of Great Britain. 



The vexatious question of impressment remained unsettled, and, 

 unhappily, provoked the war of 1812. 



I shall now pass on to the war of 1812, and to the consideration of 

 the effect of the negotiations for peace, following that war, upon the 

 differences recited in the preamble to the treaty of 1818, and sought 

 to be composed by that treaty. 



The posture of affairs between the United States and Great Britain 

 induced the Congress of the United States to declare war in June 

 1812. The fortunes of war in that contest between the two Powers 

 rested now with one side and now with the other; but in August 

 1814, Commissioners met at Ghent for the negotiation of terms of 

 peace. 



The protocols of the conferences between the Commissioners will 

 be found in extenso in the Appendix to the Case of the United States, 

 beginning with p. 242 and ending on p. 256. And the final report of 

 the American Plenipotentiaries to the Secretary of State immediately 

 follows the protocols of the conferences, commencing at the bottom 

 of p. 256 and continuing to p. 259 of the same Appendix. 



If the Tribunal please, I am pressing on to conclude within reason- 

 able limits this argument, and I am not going to detain the Tribunal 

 with reading the protocols of those negotiations. It is quite unneces- 

 sary to go into detail as to that negotiation, the results of which, after 

 all, can be stated in a very few words. 



The American Commissioners were instructed that the right to the 

 fisheries was not to be brought into discussion. This appears at the 

 top of p. 242 of the Appendix to the Case of the United States, where 

 Mr. Monroe says : 



" These rights must not be brought into discussion. If insisted on, 

 your negotiations will cease." 



