ARGUMENT OF SIB WILLIAM ROBSON. 1831 



not acknowledged by the British. At the end of the negotiations 

 they said : We will draw a line 3 miles from the shore, and we shall 

 have the right to fish only without that 3-mile limit. Now the ques- 

 tion I intended to put is not if the Americans distinguished coasts 

 and bays in the judicial sense of the words nobody denies that but 

 if they did not have facto the right to fish within 3 miles of all the 



shores. They often used the term "shores." What did they 

 1107 intend to renunciate? That they formerly had the right to 



fish on the shores of the bays is not to be denied. Now, I ask 

 whether it is probable that they not only renounce the right to fish 

 within the 3 miles, but also the right of fishing in the whole bay? 

 Was it their intention to abandon the entire bays ? And if not, I ask 

 whether the renunciation clause of the treaty can be read in the same 

 manner as the corresponding sentence in the treaty of 1783, that is 

 to say, that the four words used were only intended to describe the 

 word "coast." In the treaty of 1783 they employed three words, in 

 the treaty of 1818 four words, to express the same thing the entire 

 coast. I am a Dutchman, speaking in a language which is not my 

 own, but notwithstanding I hope to have succeeded in making my 

 meaning clear. 



SIR W. ROBSON: I understand perfectly well, Dr. Lohman, and I 

 am very much obliged for the question because it is a most important 

 question. My submission is that in 1783 they used "coasts" and 

 "bays" meaning to give the Americans the right to fish in all. As 

 you have said, they were entitled to come into every bay and fish 

 within the 3 miles. In that case the word "bays" added very little 

 to the effect of " coasts," but it was necessary because, if the treaty 

 had said "coasts" alone, the question might afterwards be raised as 

 to whether it meant "bays," because "bays" had always been, in 

 other treaties, specially mentioned when it was desired to give per- 

 mission to enter them. However, there was no difficulty in 1783, 

 because they had the right to go everywhere. Now, in 1818 the word 

 "bays" again enters into the treaty and the Americans renounce 

 "bays." They are only renouncing in 1818 that which they got in 

 1783. In 1783 they had got the right to fish along the coast, includ- 

 ing the coast of the bays. In 1818 that is the right they gave up. 

 They are not giving up any more in 1818 than they got in 1783. 

 What they got is just what they renounced, that and no more. They 

 got it as being part of the jurisdiction of England, because the mari- 

 time jurisdiction of England extended not merely over the open coast 

 and the coast of the bays, but it extended over the water of the bays, 

 and they got the right to fish in that water. Having got the right 

 from England in 1783 to fish in the water of the bays, when 1818 

 comes, England says: "Now, we will make you give up that right 

 which we gave you; we will make you renounce it," because it was 



