1510 NORTH ATLANTIC COAST FISHERIES ARBITRATION. 



1905, that any American vessel is entitled to go into waters of the 

 Treaty coast and take fish of any kind, and that she derives this right 

 from "the Treaty and not from any authority proceeding from the 

 Government of Newfoundland. 



" Nor do I find any substantial dissent from the fourth, fifth and 

 sixth propositions, which relate to the method of establishing the 

 nationality of the vessel entering the treaty waters for the purpose 

 of fishing, unless it be intended, by the comments on those proposi- 

 tions, to assert that the British Government is entitled to claim that, 

 when an American goes with his vessel upon the Treaty coast for the 

 purpose of fishing, or with his vessel enters the bays or harbors of. 

 the coast for the purpose of shelter and of repairing damages therein, 

 or of purchasing wood, or of obtaining water, he is bound to furnish 

 evidence that all the members of his crew are inhabitants of the 

 United States." 



THE PRESIDENT : Please, Sir, may I ask a question concerning two 

 statutes of American States ? I refer to the statutes of Delaware and 

 the State of Maryland. Those statutes are printed in the British 

 Case Appendix, at pp. 788 and 793. In regard to the statute of Dela- 

 ware, it says it is unlawful for any person not being a citizen of this 

 State to catch fish, and so on. Then by section 6 it is said that citizens 

 of this State who desire to fish must make a double affidavit; first, an 

 affidavit that he is a citizen of this State, and, secondly, that he will 

 not use such boat and nets in the interest of any person not a citizen 

 of this State. And the statute of Maryland is something similar. 

 As a consequence of this conception prevailing in the States of Dela- 

 ware and Maryland, would not the United States consider fishing 

 exercised by virtue of the treaty of 1818, and protected by that 

 treaty, only if it were fishing exercised in the interest of 

 913 an inhabitant of the United States? If the fishing were exer- 

 cised in the interest of a Norwegian or a German subject, it 

 would not be considered as a fishing under this treaty? These two 

 statutes, of these two different States, presuppose the fishing is done 

 for the benefit and in the interest of a person who is a citizen of 

 those particular States of the United States. As a consequence, 

 would it not be fishing, in virtue of the treaty of 1818, only if such 

 fishing were done in the interest of an inhabitant of the United 

 States? Or, is there no connection between these two cases? 



MR. ELDER : Why, as it strikes me it is this : The State of Delaware 

 and the State of Maryland have power over their waters within their 

 territorial jurisdiction, and they have a right, we will assume (I will 

 not assume for the moment that those statutes are unconstitutional) 

 they have a right to say who shall fish in their territorial waters, and 

 then they say only inhabitants of Delaware shall be allowed to fish. 



THE PRESIDENT: And only if it is in the interest of an inhabitant 

 of Delaware? 



