ARGUMENT OF JOHN S. EWABT. 1353 



can charter an American vessel and thereby entitle himself to fish 

 under the treaty. He would be fishing for himself as much as if fish- 

 ing on a vessel of his own nationality." 



So, Sirs, we are completely away, now, from the position taken by 

 Mr. Eoot, that Newfoundland has nothing to do but see if the ship's 

 papers are right ; and, instead of the very simple method suggested by 

 Mr. Root for ascertaining whether the crew could fish, namely, in- 

 spection of the ship's papers, Newfoundland now has a very, very 

 difficult investigation on hand. The United States does not contend 

 that the ship's papers are sufficient. They are only sufficient if those 

 men are fishing under engagement with an inhabitant How in the 

 world are we going to tell that? We now have to enquire as to the 

 nature of the engagement of every man there. He is a foreigner, 

 and we have to ascertain what the nature of his engagement is. Is 

 he under an engagement or not? How are we to tell? And that is 

 the test now not the flag; not the ship's papers; but the nature of 

 the employment of the man who is there. If he is under an actual 

 bond fide engagement, the United States says he may fish. If he is 

 not, he may not. That is the enquiry that we have to make. I sub- 

 mit, therefore, that the position taken by Mr. Root w T ill not stand 

 this test. 



If one were to take another case the case of American fishermen 



going in an unregistered vessel (and I do not know anything which 



requires them to be in an American vessel that has proper documents 



along with it) , Mr. Root's test would not apply to the crew of such 



vessel. It seems to me that if those men went in a vessel which was 



not registered, but which was built and owned in the United States, 



that we would have to make the enquiry as to whether the per- 



817 sons forming the crew were entitled to exercise the treaty 



rights or not. Mr. Root's test would not apply to such a case. 



There would be no papers. 



In Mr. Root's letter the statement is made that all American vessels 

 must be owned and officered by American citizens. That is true 

 under the municipal laws of the United States as they are at present. 

 At one time, I believe, it was not quite correct to say so. It was quite 

 sufficient at one time that they should be owned by a citizen, and that 

 the captain should be a citizen. But it seems to me that that is quite 

 immaterial ; because it is a mere matter of municipal law. There is 

 nothing in the treaty requiring those vessels to be owned and officered 

 by inhabitants of the United States, and those statutes might be re- 

 pealed to-morrow ; in which case, of course, the contention would be 

 that a crew composed to the last man of non-inhabitants of the 

 United States could fish in Newfoundland waters, if they had a prop- 

 erly drawn engagement with some Boston banker under which the 

 United States says that they would have a right to go in and fish. 



