1108 NORTH ATLANTIC COAST FISHERIES ARBITRATION. 



MR. WARREN: 1817 was the year, your Honour. It appears on 

 p. 297 of the Appendix to the Case of the United States in a note 

 written by Mr. Rush, Acting Secretary of State, to Mr. Bagot, un- 

 der date the 4rth August, 1817, that these vessels had put into the 

 harbour at Ragged Island, on the coast of Nova Scotia, near Shel- 

 bourne, for protection, and that they were seized within the harbour. 



All of these vessels were subsequently released, as is shown by the 

 records of the Court of Vice- Admiralty at Halifax, a copy of which 

 is found on pp. 1076 and 1077 of the second volume of the Appendix 

 to the Case of the United States. 



The charts which have been submitted indicate the position of the 

 vessels and the places where they were seized. The red lines show 

 the width of the harbours there are really two harbours, Ragged 

 Island and Port Negro and they establish that the harbours were 

 less than 6 miles wide. The other red lines outside indicate the 

 3-mile limit. 



SIR CHARLES FITZPATRICK : Did not these vessels go in for shelter ? 



MR. WARREN: Yes, Sir Charles; so the American Government 

 claimed. 



SIR CHARLES FITZPATRICK: And they were released. What point 

 is there in that? 



MR. WARREN: They were not released by the Admiralty Court at 

 Halifax because they went in for shelter ; they were released under a 

 decision by Judge Wallace, which is before the Tribunal, on the 

 ground that there was no statute under which the Admiralty Court 

 could take jurisdiction of the cases. The point is that the seizures 

 were made within the 3-mile limit, and even then there could be 

 found no British or colonial statute authorising the seizures. 



THE PRESIDENT: That was before the treaty of 1818, and of course 

 before the Act of 1819; and that was the statute which was wanting? 



MR. WARREN: A statute was wanting, Mr. President; I could not 

 say that the Act of 1819 was wanting. 



THE PRESIDENT: Yes. 



MR. WARREN : I am referring to these seizures solely to show that 

 Great Britain was not seizing vessels outside the 3-mile limit. I had 

 no other object in referring to them than that. 



It seemed to be necessary to the case of the United States to estab- 

 lish that there was nothing in the seizure of those vessels which con- 

 flicted in any manner with the position which it is claimed the Gov- 

 ernment of Great Britain was occupying, as to the limits of maritime 

 jurisdiction. 



JUDGE GRAY: As I understand it, you are now supporting your 

 contention that Great Britain had never up to this time of the treaty 

 of 1818 undertaken to assert any jurisdiction in any of these bays 

 except within 3 miles of the shore? Is that it? 



