1086 NORTH ATLANTIC COAST FISHERIES ARBITRATION. 



bay was otherwise. I am only trying to get at what the opinion 



was. 

 654 MR. WARREN : May I read Mr. Justice Story's words your 



Honour? 



" Indeed, upon the evidence before me, I incline strongly to the 

 opinion, that the limits of the county of Suffolk, in this direction, 

 not only include the place in question, but all the waters down to a 

 line running across from the lighthouse on the Great Brewster to 

 Point Alderton. In the sense of the common law, these seem to me 

 the true fauces terras, where the main ocean terminates." 



Now, he had an opportunity to go beyond that, that is, beyond the 

 Great Brewster, across to the opposite shore. 



JUDGE GRAY: Yes, but he could not go beyond those fauces terrce. 



MR. WARREN : Your Honour, he could have gone beyond the Great 

 Brewster Island, and stated that a larger body of water than that 

 lying between the lighthouse on the Great Brewster and Point 

 Alderton was within the jurisdiction of the county of Suffolk and 

 the State of Massachusetts. This will be very apparent when the 

 Tribunal looks at the chart submitted. 



JUDGE GRAY : Then I misunderstood you, that is all. 



I next take up the case of Dunham v. Lamphere, 3 Gray's Reports, 

 p. 268, which was a case involving the right of fishing, and will read 

 a portion of the opinion : 



" We suppose the rule to be, that these limits extend a marine 

 league, or three geographical miles, from the shore ; and in ascertain- 

 ing the line of shore this limit does not follow each narrow inlet or 

 arm of the sea; but when the inlet is so narrow that persons and 

 objects can be discerned across it by the naked eye, the line of terri- 

 torial jurisdiction stretches across from one headland to the other of 

 such inlet." 



I next refer the Tribunal to the case of Commonwealth v. Man- 

 chester, 152 Massachusetts Reports, p. 230, also a fishery case. The 

 syllabus of the case is as follows : 



" The territorial jurisdiction of a nation over the adjacent seas, 

 subject to the common right of navigation, extends by the law of 

 nations to the distance of one marine league at least from the shore, 

 and to bays wholly within the territory of the nation, which do not 

 exceed in width two marine leagues at the mouth; and within this 

 jurisdiction is the right of control over fisheries in such waters, 

 whether the fish are migratory and free-swimming, or free-moving, 

 or attached to or imbedded in the soil." 



The Tribunal will observe that the case involved fishing in Buzzard's 

 Bay. I will not take the time of the Tribunal to explain the geog- 

 raphy of Buzzard's Bay, which, after all, is a matter of common 

 knowledge, and the Tribunal is at liberty to consult any atlas for 

 any necessary information. The Court states, on pp. 231 and 232, 

 of the decision : 



