ARGUMENT OF JOHN S. EWAB.T. 1351 



Now, Sirs, the effect upon these treaties, of course, is most marked, 

 if the United States is right in its contention that these French 

 people, residing in St. Pierre and Miquelon these people of the 

 French islands, who are excluded from all these banks here (indicat- 

 ing on map) by treaty, may fish there (indicating on map) when 

 under engagement to inhabitants of the United States, the treaty 

 is, to a large .extent, torn up, these treaties that England forced 

 France into at the expense of extremely costly war. In the same 

 way, if the United States contention is correct, the French, who 

 have always wanted to get in here (indicating on map, part of the 

 south shore of Newfoundland) to take bait, will have an easy means 

 of accomplishing their purpose. They tried for a great many years 

 to get access to that shore, for the purpose of bait. The history of the 

 bait question, which I shall submit in connection with Question 7, will 

 show the efforts which they have made. They have now very easy 

 access there; and all the easier because the United States do not 

 want to catch the bait themselves there. They want, as the Tribunal 

 is now aware, to employ Newfoundlanders to catch bait for them 

 there; and if the contention of the United States is right, their pur- 

 pose and that of the French will be well served by a combination of 

 interests. The Americans have a right there; the French have not. 

 The Americans do not want to catch fish there ; the French do. They 

 only have to make a paper arrangement between themselves, and the 

 thing is done. The effect, therefore, applies both to the ocean fish- 

 eries and to the coast fisheries. 



I shall not dwell upon the effect so far as the Spanish are con- 

 cerned. It does not come out so clearly in connection with the treaty. 

 because there is not the language upon which to comment. The 

 Tribunal is aware that by the Treaty of Utrecht, the claims of the 

 Spanish were to be allowed only at their value, and by the treaty 

 of 1763 the claims of the Guipuscoans, which had been made in their 

 behalf by the Spanish King, were renounced. 



The remarks which still remain to me, Sirs, to make in connection 

 with this question will best be presented to the Tribunal. I think, 

 by directing them to an attack upon the various arguments which 

 the United States have put forward. 



The first of them is the one developed in Mr. Root's letter of the 



19th October, 1905, to be found in the British Case Appendix, at 



p. 492: at least, the part to which I am going to refer is at that 



page. This contention may, perhaps, be summarised under the 



words that " the flag admits the man." That seems summarily 



816 to express the contention which Mr. Root put forward in this 



letter, and I ask to read two or three paragraphs, commencing 



with the one numbered 3. In No. 1, the assertion had been made 



that " any American vessel is entitled to go into the waters of the 



