ARGUMENT OF JOHN S. EWART. 1257 



Mr. EWART: Yes, in order to put it in the treaty they would have 

 used language of this sort with the change from 10 miles to 6 miles. 

 And I do not think that they could have expressed it any more 

 shortly than that. Certainly the language that they have adopted 

 will not express it. 



In connection with that point I may explain our view as to territo- 

 riality, and why we say it is not an important feature in this case. 



We say that whatever liberties were given by the treaty of 1783, the 

 same liberties were given up in 1818. The position, therefore, so far, 

 would be the same as if no treaty had been made at all. One treaty 

 cancelled the other. The parties would have been in the same posi- 

 tion as if there had been no treaty at all. But besides cancelling the 

 1783 treaty there was an agreement in the treaty of 1818 fixing the 

 limits of territorial waters, and it was for that purpose that the dis- 

 tance of 3 miles was inserted. I say, one treaty cancelled the other, 

 but in addition to that there was an agreement as to the limit of 

 territorial waters, and that is the purpose of these words "3 miles 

 from the bays." 



What is the difference, then, between the position of the United 

 States and any other country at the present moment? I do not in- 

 clude France or Spain, because they are under treaty limitations 

 but any other country. Well, the difference is this, that as between 

 Great Britain and the United States there is a specific agreement as 

 to where the line of territoriality exists: as between Great Britain 

 and any other country that wanted to fish, there is no such agree- 

 ment. There is merely very strong evidence as to where that territo- 

 rial line ought to be drawn, furnished by a treaty as long ago as 1818, 

 made between the only two nations who were interested in that water 

 at that time. Now that is always considered by writers on interna- 

 tional law to be a very strong argument. Practically, therefore, 

 there is very little difference between the position of the United 

 States and other countries not under treaty limitations with us as to 

 that territorial line. The United States are bound by agreement; 

 the others are practically bound by the evidence. 



May I illustrate that by reference to the position in Fuca Straits? 

 There, by agreement between the United States and Great Britain, 

 a territorial line was drawn along the middle of the straits, the 



straits there being a little more than 10 miles in width. 

 758 As between those two nations, by virtue of that agreement, 

 the territorial line is in the middle of those straits. As to 

 other nations the agreement is merely evidence of where that terri- 

 torial line is. They are not absolutely bound by it as the United 

 States and Great Britain are. 



Now supposing that Great Britain at the present time sent its 

 fishing vessels or war vessels south of that line in the centre of 



