ARGUMENT OP CHARLES B. WARREN. 1139 



JUDGE GRAY : I meant " territorial waters." 



MR. WARREN : I shall not pause to discuss the question put by your 

 Honour 



JUDGE GRAY: It was not a question. I only desired to see if I 

 understood your argument. 



MR. WARREN : I shall not pause to make any further observations 

 along that line, because I have already attempted to cover the ground. 



In connection with the report of the American Commissioners and 

 the letter of the British Commissioners to their Government, I desire 

 briefly to call the attention of the Tribunal to the statement of Mr. 

 Rush, who himself was one of the negotiators of the treaty of 1818, 

 published in a book called "Memoranda of a Residence at the Court 

 of London." The date of this book was 1833, and it was, therefore, 

 published before the counsel for Great Britain assert there was any 

 contention between the two Governments as to the construction of 

 this treaty. 



The statement of Mr. Rush to which I wish to invite the attention 

 of the Tribunal is to be found on p. 323 of the Appendix to the Case 

 of the United States : 



"It was by our act that the United States renounced the right to 

 the fisheries not guaranteed to them by the convention. That clause 

 did not find a place in the British counter-pro jet. We deemed it 

 proper under a threefold view: 1, to exclude the implication of the 

 fisheries secured to us being a new grant; 2, to place the rights 

 secured and renounced, on the same footing of permanence; 3, that 

 it might expressly appear, that our renunciation was limited to three 

 miles from the coasts. This last point we deemed of the more con- 

 sequence from our fishermen having informed us, that the whole 

 fishing ground on the coast of Nova Scotia, extended to a greater 

 distance than three miles from land; whereas, along the coasts of 

 Labrador it was almost universally close in with the shore. To the 

 saving of the exclusive rights of the Hudson's Bay Company, we did 

 not object. The charter of that company had been granted in 1670, 

 and the people of the United States had never enjoyed rights in that 

 bay that could trench upon those of the company. Finally, it is to 

 be remarked, that the liberty of drying and curing on certain parts 

 of the coasts of Newfoundland, as secured in the article, had not 

 been allotted to the United States even under the old treaty of 1783." 



I have already submitted, in connection with another phase of this 

 Question, the opinion of John Quincy Adams, written in 1822, bear- 

 ing on the true construction of this treaty. I wish, however, to 

 invite the attention of the Tribunal at this point to the following 

 passage in the letter from Mr. Adams to be found on p. 162 of the 

 Appendix to the Counter-Case of Great Britain 



"It was this incident which led to the negotiations which ter- 

 minated in the convention of 20th October, 1818. In that instrument 

 the United States have renounced forever, that part of the fishing 

 liberties which they had enjoyed or claimed in certain parts of the 



