1176 NORTH ATLANTIC COAST FISHERIES ARBITRATION. 



of Fundy was not a bay within the meaning of the treaty of 1818 

 between the United States and Great Britain, and it is not an ac- 

 curate statement of this decision to say that the basis of the decision 

 of the Umpire was solely that one headland was in the United States 

 and one headland was in the territory of Great Britain. Why, if the 

 Tribunal please, the Government of Great Britain could easily have 

 remedied that difficulty by claiming that the Bay of Fundy extended 

 from the lower point of Nova Scotia to the line fixing the boundary 

 between New Brunswick and Maine, in the United States, and then 

 have had determined by that Commission the question of whether 

 that bay was within the exclusive territorial jurisdiction of the Gov- 

 ernment of Great Britain. 



The fact is that the Umpire in that case, Mr. Bates of the firm of 

 Baring Brothers, of London, decided that the Bay of Fundy was not 

 a bay within the meaning of the treaty of 1818, and he stated in his 

 decision that the rule laid down in the treaty of 1839 between Great 

 Britain and France fixed a proper limitation as to the extent of 

 territorial waters. 



Does it look, from the reading of that decision, and from the state- 

 ment of its effect, as though at that time the Government of Great 

 Britain was claiming that the bays renounced by the clause of the 

 treaty of 1818 now under consideration were geographical bays, or 

 does it look as though they were claiming that they were territorial 

 bays ? If they were territorial bays, Mr. Bates, the Umpire, decided 

 that that bay, the Bay of Fundy, was not a bay within the meaning 

 of the treaty of 1818. 



Mr. Bates said, in the conclusion of his opinion, found at p. 132 of 

 the Case- of the United States: 



" The conclusion is, therefore, in my mind irresistible, that the 

 Bay of Fundy is not a British bay, nor a bay within the meaning of 

 the word, as used in the treaties of 1Y83 and 1818." 



I am not going to delay to discuss the decision in the case of the 

 "Argus," which involved the determination of the right to call the 

 water lying inside of a line from Cape Percy, or Cow Bay Head, to 

 Cape North, on the coast of Cape Breton, a bay within the meaning 

 of the treaty of 1818. I will satisfy myself with the statement that 

 the decision was against the contention of Great Britain, and that it 

 was decided by a High Commission created by a formal treaty be- 

 tween these two Powers to pass upon claims presented. It was an 

 essential part of the determination of the claim of the owners of the 

 " Washington " and of the owners of the "Argus " as to whether or 

 not the waters within which the seizures were made were bays within 

 the meaning of the treaty of 1818. 



And counsel for Great Britain cannot escape the conclusion, if the 

 British contention were to be upheld, that it was necessary to the 



