1256 NORTH ATLANTIC COAST FISHERIES ARBITRATION. 



that they renounced only 3 miles from the coasts and from the bays, 

 creeks, and harbours. 



In order to understand that treaty I think we must put the emphasis 

 upon the 3 miles. The negotiators were not thinking particularly 

 about the bays or the harbours. They saw that the fishing was 

 all outside of 3 miles from the coast. And my point is that, having 

 in view that it was only territorial water that they were dealing with, 

 they used language to express their idea of where the line of terri- 

 toriality was. That is the reason that we say it is not necessary now 

 to discuss from the point of view of jurists what was territorial 

 water at that time, even if we could arrive at an opinion by 

 757 that process these gentlemen, having territoriality clearly in 

 mind, expressed its limit in the language of the treaty. 



Now, Sirs, it seems to me that we may ask what would have been 

 the form of that treaty under the different contentions. If the nego- 

 tiations had wanted to carry out and express the present British con- 

 tention, what would they have said? I cannot imagine any lan- 

 guage more precise than that which they used. Supposing they had 

 wished to express what the United States have contended for, what 

 would they say? If one takes the contention of the United States 

 Case they would have said this: "Three miles from low water mark 

 following the indentations of the coast." That is what I have chosen 

 to call the fishermen's idea. That is the way it would have been 

 expressed. Nothing simpler. They would not have said "3 miles 

 from the bays"; that is not what they meant. They would have 

 made no reference to the bays 3 miles from the coast wherever there 

 is any kind of water. 



Supposing that they had wanted to express the Halifax idea 

 adopted in the United States Argument, they would have said: 

 " Within 3 miles of any of the coasts or bays not more than 6 miles 

 wide." Or they might have said: "Within 3 miles of the territorial 

 bays." But then they would have had to add a proviso that territo- 

 rial bays were understood to be not more than 6 miles wide. So I 

 suppose they would have adopted the simpler language. 



Then, if they wanted to express Mr. Warren's idea I think that 

 they could not have done better than use language similar to that of 

 the North Sea Convention of 1882, the words at the top of p. 42 of 

 the British Case Appendix. They would have said: 



"Three miles from the coasts, and as to bays a distance of three 

 miles will be measured from a straight line drawn across the bay in 

 the part nearest the entrance, the first point where the opening will 

 not exceed six miles." 



SIR CHARLES FITZPATRICK: Ten miles? 

 Mr. EWART: Well, it is ten miles there. 



SHI CHARLES FITZPATRICK: Yes, it is ten miles there, but did you 

 mean 



