AEGUMENT OF SIB WILLIAM ROBSON. 1607 



it as the " Mistress of the northern seas." It may be from the 



972 strictly cod-fishing point of view, but it is only from that 



point of view; the cod-fishery there of course is everything, 



everything in the world to Newfoundland. Directly or indirectly 



everybody is concerned in it. 



Well, how can you have the law under which the population of 

 Newfoundland is to get its daily bread, divided at the very source by 

 a double sovereignty, and then divided afterwards throughout in 

 every executive act by a double sovereignty, which may or may not 

 agree? It is an impossibility. However, I am simply concerned 

 here in establishing the necessity of some system of regulation. 

 There is one point which I see I had omitted, which has a very im- 

 portant bearing on the question I had already dealt with, as to 

 whether or not the United States think regulation necessary. 



The Tribunal will remember a letter which has been often quoted, 

 in which Lord Derby, writing to someone, I forget whom, was deal- 

 ing with the case of the French coast and, the French coast, as the 

 Tribunal well knows, was upon a very different footing with regard 

 to fishery, to the south coast where the Americans had their privilege. 



The French had what they contended was an exclusive right, and 

 what was very like an exclusive right. It was a right to fish there 

 without being " interrupted " by our " competition." They said, that 

 means that you must not compete. We said that means only that we 

 must not interrupt by our competition. Well, I think competition can 

 scarcely get along without interrupting, and though I am not going 

 to pronounce any opinion upon the French claim which exercised 

 English lawyers for so long, I will simply say that the French had 

 something to say for themselves upon the question of the exclusive- 

 ness of their right. 



Now, dealing with that coast, Lord Derby said, in some of these 

 many statements to which our statesmen commit themselves, often to 

 the inconvenience of those who have afterwards to defend their 

 action, the situation on the French coast is somewhat analogous to that 

 of a " common sea." And, Mr. Root, in one of his despatches, caught 

 hold of this, and said that the same observation (I am not quoting his 

 exact words, but I think very nearly) is applicable to the situation 

 created by the American right. 



Now, what is a " common sea " ? A common sea is a part of the 

 high seas subject to no regulation. No one claims dominion over it. 

 No one claims ownership in it. It has no sovereignty. It is one of 

 the few places in the world where you can escape government, unless 

 you are in a boat. You do not escape it as long as you are under a 

 flag. But, still, there is no government in the high seas. If we are to 

 take Mr. Root's despatch literally (I do not know whether he would 

 desire us to do it or not perhaps not) if it is to be literally construed, 



