1230 NORTH ATLANTIC COAST FISHERIES ARBITRATION. 



within three miles of the shore, and where there does not appear 

 to have been any pretence for asserting that she was within any 

 bay, or in unlawful propinquity to any bay on the coast of Nova 

 Scotia. I transmit herewith to your Lordship the copy of the opin- 

 ion delivered upon the case of the 'Argus ' by the Queen's Advocate, 

 and have to direct your Lordship to adopt such measures as may 

 appear to you to be expedient for affording reparation to the parties 

 who have been injured in the transaction. 



Evidently the opinion of the law officers was taken ; evidently they 

 said this headland theory is not something which is applicable to 

 North American coasts; the treaty says nothing about that sort of 

 thing; this seizure was not "within any bay or in unlawful propin- 

 quity to any bay;" it is unjustifiable; and Lord Stanley directed 

 reparation to be made for the wrong done. 



For some reason, unexplainable upon the material which is before 

 the Tribunal, Governor Falkland does not seem to have acted upon 

 those very definite instructions; and he seems to have allowed the 

 case of the "Argus " to go to arbitration at the same time that the 

 " Washington " went to arbitration before Mr. Bates and the others. 

 Whether that was for the purpose merely of ascertaining the amount 

 of the damages I cannot say. That probably was Governor Falk- 

 land's idea, because one cannot imagine Governor Falkland acting so 

 directly contrary to the instructions which he had received from the 

 Colonial Office. But if Governor Falkland allowed the matter to 

 go to the Tribunal merely for the purpose of assessment of damages, 

 and so far exceeded his instructions, counsel, when the case got there, 

 seems also to have exceeded his instructions and to have argued in 

 justification of the seizure. That is immaterial. I said that the 

 British Government had always taken one view, and that that was 

 not the headland-theory view. It is immaterial what Governor 

 Falkland did, or what counsel unauthorisedly did, before the Tribu- 

 nal that was engaged in investigating that subject. 



Other seizures were made by a provincial cruiser in 1852 under 

 Captain Dodd, the same man, I believe, who seized the' " Argus." 

 He seems to have hkd the headland idea in his mind, and it will be 

 observed from what I have read, that the " Argus " was seized not 

 by an Imperial vessel but by a provincial vessel, and therefore not 

 in pursuance of Admiralty instructions. 



Those other seizures in 1852 were repudiated by the Provincial 

 Government and never came before the Imperial Government at all. 

 It was not necessary. The Tribunal will therefore see that my state- 

 ment remains unimpaired that the British Government has had but 

 one view of this treaty from the commencement of the discussion 

 until to-day, namely, that " within three miles of a bay " means 

 there is no other language to express it within three miles of a bay. 



Now, Sirs, I have listened with great interest to Mr. Warren's 

 very elaborate and very able argument, but I have heard only one 



