ABGUMENT OF JOHN S. EWAKT. 1231 



objection to that position or attitude taken by the British Govern- 

 ment I mean apart, of course, from the argument by which he sup- 

 ports his own view. And that argument is based upon the practical 

 impossibility of applying such a method of ascertaining what the 

 treaty means. 



Mr. Warren has put in maps covered with suggestive red lines, 

 and he asks the Tribunal: Which of those are you going to take? 

 Well, Sirs, I have two answers to that. In the first place I think that 

 if the members of the Tribunal will take any of those charts and look 

 at almost any bay, they will find their minds at once coming to an 

 opinion as to where the headlands are. If two or three are looking, 

 one will say " It is here," almost at once, almost instantly, and very 

 frequently there will be agreement amongst all those who are look- 

 ing at the same map. Sometimes questions of doubt arise it may 

 be here or it may be there. But there is a very simple rule for deter- 

 mining in case of doubt, which cannot be resolved in any other way, 

 namely take the shorter line. There is always a shorter line and 

 a longer line. Very well. If you cannot agree upon that longer 

 line, don't give it, take the shorter line. 



That is the first answer I have to make, and if the members of the 

 Tribunal will take Mr. Warren's map, unembarrassed by all the red 

 lines, and each separately mark down where they would draw those 

 headland lines they will find not much disagreement. Where there 

 is disagreement, then, if they will take the shorter line, they will 

 have solved the difficulty that Mr. Warren has put to the Tribunal. 



But, Sirs, my second answer is that that difficulty, if it be one, and 

 it is only one of fact, can be resolved either in the way I have sug- 

 gested or by a modality (of which we heard so much from Mr. 

 Turner) which is often the complement of a treaty a method, not 

 of altering or reforming the treaty, but of carrying it out. It is a 



very proper word, for something which often is necessary. 

 742 And a further answer which I make is that this practical 

 difficulty has never been sufficient to deter nations from mak- 

 ing arrangements as to bays. If you will take the treaty between 

 Great Britain and France in 1686, at p. 6 of the British Case Ap- 

 pendix, you will there find a reciprocal agreement for abstention 

 from fishing-- 



u in the havens, bays, creeks, roads, shoals or places, which the King 

 of Great Britain possesses or shall hereafter possess in America." 



How are you going to find out what a "bay" is? That practical 



difficulty was not sufficient to prevent the making of that treaty. If 



that is a little too long ago, let us take the treaty between the United 



States and France in the United States Case Appendix, at p. 92, 



92909 S. Doc. 870, 61-3, vol 10 22 



