ARGUMENT OF CHARLES B. WARREN. 1105 



And the second reference is to the British Case Appendix, p. 85, 

 where will be found an extract from the instructions from Lord 

 Castlereagh, Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs for 

 Great Britain, to Messrs. Kobinson and Goulb^rn who were the Com- 

 missioners in behalf of Great Britain in 1818. Lord Castlereagh 

 stated in these instructions, under date the 24th August, 1818 : 



" The accompanying papers will bring the present state of the 

 fishery question under your view. I refer you to the proceedings at 

 Ghent for those arguments upon which the British plenipotentiaries 

 maintained, as I conceive unanswerably, that the second branch of 

 the Illrd Article of the treaty of 1783 had expired with the war." 



Then in the next paragraph he said : 



" The subsequent correspondence will show 



which, of course was a part of the accompanying papers 



" the nature of the claim put forward by the American Government 

 soon after the peace." &c. 



I submit that in this correspondence enclosed by Lord Castlereagh, 

 Lord Bathurst had stated, in language characterised by great exact- 

 ness, the extent of the claim of the Government of Great Britain. 

 And I repeat, there was no broad claim of jurisdiction over large 

 bays or large bodies of water adjacent to the shores. 



The 3-marine-mile line was measured from the shore, and within 

 that line were the waters denied to the vessels of the United States. 

 The negotiations thereupon proceeded with a definite understanding 

 that there was no controversy as to the extent of the maritime juris- 

 diction of Great Britain in respect of these fisheries as against the 

 inhabitants of the United States. 



Surveying for a moment this correspondence between the two Gov- 

 ernments relating to the arrangement of the details for a modifica- 

 tion of the liberty previously recognised as belonging to American 

 fishermen, and with the knowledge in mind that the extent of juris- 

 diction was not now a subject of controversy, the conclusion is irre- 

 sistible that the negotiation did not involve any assumed claim to 

 jurisdiction over the outer bays or the large bodies of water adjacent 

 to the British possessions in North America. 



After the notes had been exchanged between Mr. Adams and 

 666 Lord Bathurst, Lord Bathurst, in a note on p. 278 of the Ap- 

 pendix to the United States Case, expressed a willingness 



" to enter into negotiations with the Government of the United 

 States for the modified renewal of the liberties in question ; and they 

 doubt not that an arrangement may be made satisfactory to both 

 countries, and tending to confirm the amity now so happily subsist- 

 ing between them." 



Mr. Adams transmitted this note from Lord Bathurst to his Gov- 

 ernment under date the 8th November, 1815. The note is found on 



