ARGUMENT OF SAMUEL J. ELDEB. 1541 



waters of Newfoundland. The Tribunal is not asked whether the 

 American owner can employ a non-inhabitant of the United States in 

 contravention of that provision any more than it is asked whether 

 he can employ an inhabitant of the United States in contravention of 

 that provision. 



The Newfoundland Act of the 10th May, 1906, which still awaits 

 the approval of the Government of Great Britain (United States 

 Case Appendix, p. 199) provides that: 



" No person, being a British subject, shall fish in, from, or for a 

 foreign fishing vessel in the waters of this Colony." 



The Tribunal is not asked whether the United States can employ 

 a non-inhabitant whose acceptance of the employment would be in 

 contravention of that provision. The same Act further provides: 



" No person, being a resident of this Colony, shall leave this Col- 

 ony for the purpose of engaging in foreign fishing vessels which are 

 fishing or intending to fish in the waters of this Colony." 



The Tribunal is not asked whether the United States c| employ 

 a non-inhabitant whose employment would be in contravention of 

 that provision. 



Mr. Ewart has suggested in his oral argument (p. 4776) that the 

 French and Spanish are under certain treaty obligations with Great 

 Britain which nciay affect their engagement. The Tribunal is not 

 asked whether a United States owner may employ, as a member of 

 his crew, a non-inhabitant who, by reason of being a Frenchman, 

 or a Spaniard, would be forbidden by the treaty obligations of his 

 own Government to enter such engagement. 



Nor is the Tribunal asked whether the American owner can em- 

 ploy, as a member of his crew, Norwegians, or Danes, or Germans, 

 or people of any other particular country, whose engagement would 

 be in contravention of the laws binding upon the citizens of their 

 respective countries. 



It should be observed that the one question of this character which 

 the counsel for Great Britain insists should be answered by the Tri- 

 bunal comes in the last category of questions. So far as this record 

 is concerned such a question would be purely hypothetical, because 

 there does not appear to be any law of Newfoundland forbidding 

 her citizens from engaging upon American vessels. The laws of 

 Newfoundland prohibit the engagement of any person whomsoever 

 in her waters, and prohibit any Newfoundlander from leaving her 

 territory for the purpose of making such an engagement. But ex- 

 cept as to Newfoundlanders covered by general provisions applicable 

 to all persons whomsoever, or who are implicated in the specific 

 act of leaving for the purpose of engaging with a foreign fishing- 

 vessel, there is no prohibition. 



