1542 NORTH ATLANTIC COAST FISHERIES ARBITRATION. 



If the Tribunal were now called upon to pass upon the 

 933 effect of a prohibition by Newfoundland against her citi- 

 zens engaging in American fishing-vessels, they would have 

 to deal with a supposititious case, a statute the form and scope of 

 which no one can now forecast. There might be any number of 

 difficult questions arising under such a statute. For instance, would 

 the prohibition apply only to Newfoundlanders within the jurisdic- 

 tion of Newfoundland, or would it apply to Newfoundlanders who 

 have left that jurisdiction? This would involve not merely the ques- 

 tion upon which there is so wide a difference of opinion, between 

 most Continental States and Great Britain and the United States, 

 as to the power of a Sovereign State to follow it citizens over the 

 whole world, with prohibitions affecting them, but also the question 

 whether a colony which is not an independent Sovereign State can, 

 in the exercise of its limited governmental control, follow its citizens 

 in like manner? 



Another question which might arise would be whether it is com- 

 petent for the colony of Newfoundland to prevent its citizens from 

 acquiring the status of inhabitants of the United States? You will 

 remember that the statute prohibits Newfoundlanders from leaving 

 the colony for the purpose of shipping, and that would include their 

 leaving the colony for the purpose of acquiring a residence and then 

 shipping. 



It is plain that when the questions were framed, it was imprac- 

 ticable to cover the whole range of possible questions which might 

 arise, because of matters dehors the treaty of 1818, and no such ques- 

 tion was asked, or is now submitted to this Tribunal. 



Counsel are not here to frame and submit questions. They are here 

 to argue the questions which have been submitted by the formal act 

 of the two Governments. It is respectfully submitted that the limit 

 to which the Tribunal can go in regard to questions that might arise 

 based upon matters other than mere inhabitancy or non-inhabitancy 

 is, in deciding Question 2, to state that their award does not cover 

 this question. 



THE PRESIDENT: Of course, we are only to answer the questions as 

 they are asked ; but does not Question 2 in its general terms ask the 

 Tribunal whether the inhabitants of the United States, while exercis- 

 ing the liberties referred to in the said article, have a right to employ 

 as members of their fishing crews all persons not inhabitants of the 

 United States? The question is quite general. 



MR. ELDER: Yes. 



THE PRESIDENT: Whether they have a right to employ persons 

 non-inhabitants of the United States. Is not that to be understood 

 in the sense that they have the right to employ all persons non- 

 inhabitants of the United States, or every person not an inhabitant 

 of the United States. 



