1814 NORTH ATLANTIC COAST FISHERIES ARBITRATION. 



is declared, and then I will take my chances. It is not a question of 

 picking a few passages out of the letters of Mr. Adams, or anything 

 of that kind. Before 1818 everybody agreed statesmen and diplo- 

 matists and navy men and everybody else that the bays are within 

 the maritime jurisdiction. And Mr. Warren, who presented ;i very 

 able argument upon this part of the case, got on excellently when 

 once he had assumed that maritime jurisdiction meant only 3 miles 

 from the shore. As soon as you can ignore bays and treat your 

 maritime jurisdiction as thus confined, it is a very easy process of 

 reasoning. But the question is, are you entitled to ignore bays ? Let 

 us begin at the beginning. I will not be long, because, after all, the 

 ground has been trod before me ; but still I must recall it in order to 

 put the case before the Tribunal as a whole upon this point. But I 

 will avoid repetition. 



Take the very first use in which you have the word "bays" the 

 first international document in which the word "bays" is used, be- 

 cause that is what we have to find out. In what sense was the word 

 "bays" used in the treaty of 1783? I take the treaty of 1783 because 

 we are all agreed Mr. Warren agreed, the printed pleadings of the 

 United States agree, I agree that the words in the treaty of 1818 

 relating to bays were taken from the treaty of 1783. The United 

 States Argument says at p. 143 and p. 230 first on p. 143 : 



" The language in the proposed article, ' coasts, bays, creeks or har- 

 bours of His Britannic Majesty's Dominions in America ' was gath- 

 ered from the treaty of 1783." 



There are a great many other such references. It is the same right 

 away through their pages. I need not give them all. There are 144, 

 147. 228, 229 passages on all these pages show that the words were 

 taken from the treaty of 1783. And then on p. 230, which is the only 

 one I thought it worth while to note because it is so complete, it is 

 said : 



" It is submitted, then, that the treaty of 1818 was in many respects 

 a Chinese copy of the treaty of 1783." 



They copied literally, and unintelligently I suppose it is intended to 

 imply, but anyhow they did copy the words. Perhaps I had better 

 read some of these references, if there is any doubt on this point I 

 thought it was all agreed. P. 143, it says in the last paragraph : 



"The language in the proposed article, 'coasts, bays, creeks or har- 

 bours of His Britannic Majesty's Dominions in America ' was gath- 

 ered from the treaty of 1783." 



1097 And then the same is repeated on p. 147 and on p. 228 that 

 is a very useful paragraph. It says (just under the heading 

 " Treaty of 1783 ") : 



'" It is proposed to show that the language of the treaty of 1818 

 was drawn from the treaty of 1783 and has the same meaning in 

 both treaties," 



