ARGUMENT OF SIR WILLIAM BOBSON. 1875 



must exist somewhere, but have been misplaced. A very large por- 

 tion of this letter deals with other subjects. 



THE PRESIDENT : There is only a very short paragraph alluding to 

 this matter, whereas the letter itself is very long, and its reference 

 to this subject might very well have been overlooked. 



SIR W. ROBSON : This letter may have been seen, but the material 

 passage may not have been discovered, because it is nearly all about 

 the confinement of Napoleon on St. Helena. I am only conjecturing 

 now, but it was probably put into some docket or lot of papers which 

 concerned that rather than the fisheries, because the main portion of 

 the letter is about preventing vessels from calling at St. Helena. It 

 is just pointed out by my learned friend, Sir Robert Finlay, that 

 our Appendix does show that, in fact Mr. Baker's letter was most 

 probably shown because, as I have just shown, Mr. Adams says: 

 " You will see from the letter itself what it says." Obviously, Lord 

 Bathurst had said : " I have sent a letter to Mr. Baker, and I have 

 told him to show it to Mr. Monroe." So that the matter was never 

 in any substantial doubt, even on the documents we have got, but now 

 it is put beyond any necessity for argument. Well, now, see the 

 difference that that makes in Mr. Warren's argument. It is no 

 longer any use for him to point to a passage here about maritime 

 jurisdiction and say that means 1 league. That will not do any 

 longer, because maritime jurisdiction means all the bays and the 1 

 league. 



I need not go through Mr. Adams' mistake and deal with his 

 account of the correspondence, because I think that may be treated, 

 now, as settled. He does write to Lord Bathurst, and he does, in his 

 letter to Lord Bathurst, purport to give an account of the conversa- 

 tion that they had between them on the 9th September, but it is a 

 very, very imperfect account. He does not mention in that letter 

 either bays or creeks. So that it is clearly not a very full account. 

 Then, by the way, I cannot pass this point without drawing atten- 

 tion to an inaccuracy in the United States Argument, because they 

 have made an inaccuracy even in advance of Mr. Adams'. Mr. 

 Adams dropped out the word " bays," and spoke of " creeks and close 

 upon the shores." But 'the United States dropped out the word 

 " bays " and also the word " and," and treats Lord Bathurst's state- 

 ment as if it had been " creeks close upon the shores." That makes a 

 lot of difference. So that " bays, creeks and harbours and waters 

 close upon the shores " are diminished in the United States Argu- 

 ment to " creeks close upon the shores." I will find that a little later. 

 I can not put my finger on the reference at the moment. 



I go on now with these letters. There are very few more. 



Then comes the letter to which reference has been made, where 

 Lord Bathurst complains of the way in which the American fisher- 



