ABGUMENT OF SAMUEL J. ELDEB. 1577 



the President asked him the question. The answer was at p. 3530 of 

 the record, where he says that except when they come in for drying 

 and curing, they would have no right. Of course he said, " we should 

 let them," but, as a matter of fact, under the treaty, they have no 

 right whatever of shelter and the like. 



Third, as to this strip along here on the southern coast (indicating 

 on map) the United States fishermen have the right to dry and cure 

 their fish, and of course they must go into bays and harbours to do 

 that. They can dry and cure on the unsettled portions, or make an 

 arrangement with the owner or possessor of the ground, so that they 

 can get a leasehold from the owner, or permission from him. But 

 the contention is that American fishermen cannot take any fish in 

 those bays that they go into. That is to say, we cannot fish in the 

 very bays on to the shores of which we can go for the purpose of 

 drying and curing fish. 



This is all that I have to say with reference to Question 6. 



I shall now ask the attention of the Tribunal to Question 7. 



This determination seems to rest very largely on the meaning of 

 the question: 



"Are the inhabitants of the United States, whose vessels resort to 

 the treaty coasts for the purpose of exercising the liberties referred 

 to in Article 1 of the Treaty of 1818 entitled to have for those vessels, 

 when duly authorized by the United States in that behalf, the com- 

 mercial privileges on the treaty coasts accorded by agreement or 

 otherwise to United States trading vessels generally ? " 



Great Britain tells the Tribunal that that is an inquiry as to 

 whether the treaty of 1818 gave United States fishing-vessels any 

 commercial privileges. Clearly it does not. It is a fishing treaty, 

 and we look through it from one end to the other, and there is noth- 

 ing about commercial privileges whatever. It was at a time when 

 Great Britain did not grant commercial privileges on those coasts to 

 any one. Newfoundland was a fishing-station in the Atlantic, as it 

 was described, a ship moored there. All rights of trade were re- 

 served to Great Britain and to its subjects. Long after our trading- 

 vessels were admitted to the West Indies and to other sections, they 

 could not go on to the Newfoundland shores, or indeed to the colonial 

 shores in the North Atlantic at all. And yet Great Britain says that 

 this question is as to whether the treaty of 1818 gave us commercial 

 privileges on that coast. 



Great Britain knew quite well that the United States did not make 

 that contention. Take the British Case itself, at p. 141, and towards 

 the bottom of the page is Mr. Daniel Manning's report, as Secretary 

 of the Treasury, to the House of Representatives : 



" American fishing- vessels duly authenticated by this department, 

 and having a permit ' to touch and trade,' should be permitted to 



