1650 NORTH ATLANTIC COAST FISHERIES ARBITRATION. 



they were both there and could be fishing at the same time, and it 

 might be, more or less at the same place, but the right would be abso- 

 lutely a different right. My learned friend, Mr. Peterson, who is an 

 authority upon this part of the case, speaks with the same positive- 

 ness, as I have ventured to speak myself. That would not be a right 

 in common at all, and lawyers would not so describe it. So that, in 

 so far as the technical part of the case is concerned, my submission is 

 that the United States have not shown a case. I do not know what 

 may be coming, but, at all events, upon the documents submitted, and 

 upon the oral argument, the United States have shown no case what- 

 ever for their suggestion that these words have some technical and 

 peculiar import which has the effect of conferring some ownership 

 upon the United States. Such import is not known to, at all events, 

 the English lawyer, and I shall, await with interest to hear from 

 what English authorities it can be said that any sanction is given at 

 all to that contention or suggestion. 



THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will adjourn till to-morrow at 10 

 o'clock. 



[Thereupon at 3.55 o'clock p. m., the Tribunal adjourned until to- 

 morrow, Tuesday, July 26, 1910, at 10 o'clock a. m.] 



THIRTIETH DAY : TUESDAY, JULY 26, 1910. 



The Tribunal met at 10 a. m. 



THE PRESIDENT: Will you please continue, Mr. Attorney-General? 



THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL, SIR WILLIAM ROBSON (resuming) : Be- 

 fore proceeding to deal with servitudes, a subject upon which I pro- 

 pose to invite the attention of the Tribunal to-day, I find I omitted 

 yesterday a small point, but one which might perhaps be treated as 

 important by Mr. Root, therefore I had better deal with it for a 

 moment or two. 



It was suggested by Mr. Turner that when the sum payable under 

 the Halifax Award fell due to be paid, Mr. Evarts, on behalf of the 

 United States, expressed unwillingness to pay unless he could get 

 some satisfactory assurance from Lord Salisbury as to the claim to 

 jurisdiction being then put forward by Lord Salisbury in connection 

 with the Fortune Bay dispute. 



The two events coincided. The amount payable under the Halifax 

 Award was, of course, in respect of the treaty of 1871. The excess 

 in value of the advantages conferred on the United States by Great 

 Britain as compared with those conferred by the United States on 

 Great Britain under that treaty. 



Well, under that treaty, or during the period of that treaty, the 

 Fortune Bay dispute arose, and then it was that the United States 



