ARGUMENT OF CHARLES B. WARREN. 1153 



The United States contends that the orders issued to the Admiralty 

 of Great Britain and by the Admiralty to the vessels stationed in the 

 North Atlantic, conclusively demonstrate that the construction put 

 upon the treaty of 1818 by Great Britain was that United States 

 fishing-vessels should be permitted to fish within any of the large 

 bodies of water, provided fishing operations were not conducted 

 within 3 miles of the shore. 



It is, perhaps, important to call attention to the nature of the Act 

 of 1819 which is relied upon by the Counsel for Great Britain as a 

 construction of the treaty. 



I have only to say this regarding that Act. It is the unilateral act 

 of Great Britain, and, in any event, if its terms are examined the 

 Act will be found in the Appendix to the Case of the United States 

 at pp. 112, 113, and 114 it will be found merely to follow the lan- 

 guage of the Treaty itself, and therefore it is really of no importance 

 in the discussion of the Question with which I am now immediately 

 concerned. 



In the Case presented on behalf of the United States at pp. 77 to 

 82 will be found discussed in detail the seizures made between 1821 

 and 1824, and no seizures were made after 1824 until after the pas- 

 sage of the Nova Scotia Act in 1836. 



In the Case of the United States, the evidence to substantiate the 

 place of the seizures is specifically referred to, and it is established 

 in respect to each seizure that the claim was made in behalf of Great 

 Britain that an offence had been committed within 3 marine miles of 

 the shore ; and it is also established that no attempt was made, prior 

 to the appearance of the Nova Scotia theory of interpretation, to 

 prevent the fishing-vessels of the United States from fishing in the 

 waters of any of the large outer bays, provided they remained out- 

 side the 3-mile limit from the shores and outside the bays, harbours, 

 and creeks lying landward of the 3-mile line, unless they resorted to 

 such small bays, harbours, and creeks for one of the four purposes 

 specified in the proviso clause of the renunciatory clause of the treaty. 



In the Case of the United States, on p. 75, will be found this state- 

 ment : 



" During the eighteen years from 1818 to 1836, and, in fact, for 

 several years thereafter, no question arose between Great Britain and 

 the United States under this treaty involving the interpretation of 



the meaning of its provisions. . . . The only seizures of 

 696 American vessels during this period were made between the 



years 1821 and 1824 for alleged violations of the provisions of 

 this section of the act. It will be found upon an examination of the 

 circumstances surrounding these seizures that in every instance they 

 were made under the direction of British naval officers on the charge 

 of fishing within three miles of the shore in waters wherein the 

 liberty of fishing had been renounced by the treaty, or of being 



