1842 NORTH ATLANTIC COAST FISHERIES ARBITRATION. 



they are only discussing the extent of the territorial jurisdiction, 

 which they attach as the coast-line limit, does not mean that ba\> 

 are to be ignored. It means that bays are on a separate footing alto- 

 gether. In this particular document they are not thinking about 

 bays. The thing they are discussing is the general coast-line. The 

 general coast-line is one thing and a bay is another. The inferences 

 which I draw from these documents may appear here and there to be 

 strained because they require so much exposition. but later on, as I 

 am dealing with them chronologically, what appears to be only ;i 

 matter of inference or argument, will come out in the clearest terms 

 by their explicit statements when I come to the later .and absolutely 

 conclusive documents. 



There are other instances of the same kind; I might enumerate 

 them. On p. 96 of the British Counter-Case Appendix. Mr. Town- 

 shend makes proposals, and I think I might take this as a very good 

 instance of what I might call this offhand use of the words " shore " 

 and " bays." 



"Art. 3d. The citizens of the United States shall have the liberty 

 of taking fish of every kind on all the banks of Newfoundland, and 

 also in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and also to dry and cure their fish 

 on the shores of the Isle of Sables, and on the shores of any of the 

 unsettled bays, harbours, and creeks of the Magdalen Islands in the 

 Gulf of St. Lawrence, so long as such bays, harbours and creeks shall 

 continue and remain unsettled. On condition that the citizens of 

 the said United States do not exercise the said fishery, but at the di>- 

 tance of Three leagues from all the coasts belonging to Great Britain." 



There you see again you may come into the bays and use the hays 

 and the shores of the bays, but you may not fish within 3 leagues 

 from the coasts; that is the general coast-line which is inclusive of 



bays. 



1114 At this time and here let me make it clear at once because 

 it leads up to a very useful distinction the really dominant 

 thing in the minds of the negotiating parties is the word " coast." 

 The bay is a component part of the coast but they are asking for the 

 coast inclusive of the bay, and although the word " bay " is put in. 

 and I say by habit and for caution, yet they are thinking, as I think 

 Dr. Lohman pointed out in the questions that he put to me, mainly of 

 the coast. Later on a time comes when they are thinking of the bay 

 and less of the coast. In 1782 they are asking for tin- whole fi-lu-ry 

 along all the coast; whether it be open coast or the indented coast they 

 want it all, and therefore " coast " is the word that is most important 

 and that is the thing upon which they are laying stress. Afterwards, 

 when, instead of inclusion, exclusion is being considered, when Eng- 

 land turns round and says: The coast is one thing: but you shall not 

 have the bay, then the word "bay" begins to be an important con- 

 sideration, but up to this stage where they are asking for everything 



