1228 NORTH ATLANTIC COAST FISHERIES ARBITRATION. 



In section 106 (p. 2 of the British extract) this author states: 



" Bays and gulfs are undoubtedly a part of the territorial sea, at 

 least in case their extent is not such that it would be impossible to 

 prevent the entry from the shore. 



"' Further, even when the mouth of the gulf or bay is too large to 

 be able to be defended from the shore, they ought still, following 

 Grotius, to be included in the territorial sea, if by their extent, as 

 compared with that of the land into whose coasts they encroach, they 

 may be considered as constituting a part of the territory," (citing 

 Grotius, Book 2, Chapter 3, Section 8). 



Masse commits the error of misconstruing what Grotius said in his 

 great work as to the nature of bodies of water which might appear 

 a part of the land, and this accounts for the position taken in the 

 extract just read. 



Again, I respectfully affirm that the facts abundantly establish 

 the position of the United States on this Question 5, but an examina- 

 tion of the authorities submitted in behalf of the United States and 

 in behalf of Great Britain will, I believe, disclose that they support 

 the contention of the United States, and do not support the contention 

 put forward by Great Britain. 



I beg to thank the Tribunal for the very careful attention that I 

 have received and to ask pardon for the extended time consumed 

 to-day, but I desired to close at this session of the Tribunal. 



[Whereupon, at 5.45 p. m., the Tribunal adjourned until to-mor- 

 row, Tuesday, July 12, 1910, at 10 o'clock a. m.] 



740 TWENTY-THIRD DAY: TUESDAY, JULY 12, 1910. 



The Tribunal met at 10 o'clock a. m. 



ARGUMENT OF MB. JOHN S. EWART, K. C., ON BEHALF OF GREAT 



BRITAIN. 



MR. EWART: Mr. President and gentlemen of the Tribunal: I in- 

 tend to offer to the Tribunal some contributions I hope helpful con- 

 tributions to the consideration of Questions 1,2, 5, and 7. But as 

 the subject of bays is now prominently in the minds of the members 

 of the Tribunal, I think it will be advisable that I should commence 

 with Question 5. 



Upon that question, Sirs, the British Government has, during the 

 whole controversy, had but one view. It has never seen any reason 

 to depart from the idea that when the treaty said " three miles from 

 bays," it meant exactly what it said three miles from bays. In 

 fact, the British Government has never been able to express that idea 

 in any other language; and when they are giving their interpreta- 



