1422 NORTH ATLANTIC COAST FISHERIES ARBITRATION. 



I should like to call attention to the nature of the claim which the 

 United States is now making namely, a right to veto reasonable 

 regulations. In their contention they say that American fishermen 

 are not subject to regulations (a) "unless they are appropriate and 

 necessary . . . ."; (b) "unless they are reasonable . . . ."; and (c) 

 " unless," as I read it, " regulations of that character are agreed to by 

 the United States." It has been suggested by Senator Turner that 

 by the British contention the purpose is indicated of giving advan- 

 tages to local fishermen of some kind because the word " unfairly " 

 is used in the contention of the British Government as set out in the 

 question; and Senator Turner says that the use of that word indi- 

 cates an intention to give advantages of some kind advantages which 

 the British Government would consider to be fair. I should like 

 to say that the reason for the insertion of that word is that geography 

 and the treaty have given some advantages to the British fishermen, 

 and that the use of the word " unfairly " merely means that such 

 advantages as the British fishermen are already in the enjoyment of 

 should not be interfered with. Of course, there is no intention of 

 interfering with the United States by taking from them any advan- 

 tages which the treaty has given them. It is only for the purpose 

 of protecting the British Government in any contention that might 

 afterwards arise that there could be no difference between the situa- 

 tion of the two parties ; whereas the treaty and geography have made 

 a difference between the two. To give merely one example, I might 

 mention the disposal of gurry. The United States are at a disad- 

 vantage, because they cannot deposit their gurry on the shore and 

 make use of it there as the Newfoundlander's may. That is an ad- 

 vantage which the treaty has given to the Newfoundland people, and 

 the word " unfairly " was inserted with reference to such advantages. 



It is frequently contended in the United States Case and Argu- 

 ment, and it has also been contended by Senator Turner, that the 

 United States would be extremely reasonable in case an application 

 were made to them for the purpose of concurring in regulations which 

 Canada or Newfoundland might wish to adopt. Senator Turner 

 rather marred the effect of his statement, I think, by the assertion, 

 backed up by some authority, that no regulations at all were neces- 

 sary. Although we do not, of course, doubt in the slightest degree 

 the absolute good faith of the United States, yet, Sirs, we are uncer- 

 tain as to the extent of their knowledge as to the necessity of regu- 

 lations, and we are not at all sure of their absolute impartiality. 

 It seems to us, Sirs, that the United States has already indicated in 

 its Argument, at p. 66, that there would be very considerable diffi- 

 culty in obtaining its assent even as to reasonable regulations, 

 because, in the middle of the page, the Argument says this : 



