ARGUMENT OF SAMUEL J. ELDER. 1457 



United States. It was at that time that he used the language which 

 has already been read to the Court, beginning at p. 413 of the United 

 States Counter-Case Appendix, at the bottom : 



" The treaty of 1902, now before the Senate of the United States, 

 is intended to secure to American fishermen equal privileges with our 

 own people in the winter herring fishery ; and I repeat that the state- 

 ment made by Messrs. Pew and Sons, that the Americans under the 



treaty of 1818 have the right to buy or take these herring in 

 880 the creeks and harbors on the southern coast of Newfoundland, 



between Cape Ray and Rameau Islands, and on the northern 

 and western coast of Newfoundland between Cape Ray and Quirpon 

 Islands, is incorrect and misleading; and I desire to emphasize the 

 statement that, in my opinion, the fishermen of the United States of 

 America have no right, under the treaty of 1818, either to take for 

 themselves or to purchase bait fishes in the harbors, creeks, between 

 Cape Ray and Rameau Islands on the southern coast of Newfound- 

 land, or in the harbours, creeks, or coves between Cape Ray and Quir- 

 pon Islands on the northern and western coast; and that the liberty 

 extended to them under the treaty of 1818 to take fish in the harbours, 

 bays, and creeks of this colony is limited to that portion of our de- 

 pendency from Mount Joly, on the southern coast of Labrador, to 

 and through the Straits of Belle Isle, and thence northwardly indefi- 

 nitely. This is a point of vast importance to the people of this 

 country. I believe I am correct in saying that it is the first time that 

 this position has been taken, and, if I am correct in my interpreta- 

 tion of the treaty of 1818, the whole winter herring fishery of the west 

 coast has been carried on for years by the Americans, simply at the 

 sufference of the Government of this colony." 



That is Question 6, 



I hope to show that not only had this idea not been conceived by 

 the great minds which had dealt with the treaty from 1818 down to 

 1905, with the numberless disquisitions which had been written of 

 and concerning it, but that even Sir Robert Bond himself had not 

 conceived it until within a year of the time when he announced it. 

 Certainly he had not conceived it on the 15th April, 1904, as I shall 

 hope to show. We have to deal with many ancient questions in this 

 case ; questions of great historic interest ; questions that have engaged 

 the best minds of the two countries in all these intervening years ; but 

 this is not an ancient question; it is hardly out of its swaddling 

 clothes, and we can but hope that its swaddling clothes will prove its 

 shroud. 



Sir Robert goes on to say, at p. 415 of the Appendix to the United 

 States Counter-Case that 4,000 out of the 8,000 fishermen on Massa- 

 chusetts vessels are Newfoundlanders, showing the extent to which 

 that practice of employment had then gone. He speaks of the duty 

 imposed by the United States as being 25 per cent., that being the 

 bone of his real complaint. He gives a description of the Bond- 

 Blame treaty, which was held up by Canada, to which I have 

 alluded, the Hay-Bond treaty, which had then been held up, he says, 



