ARGUMENT OF SIB WILLIAM ROBSON. 1913 



the inhabitants of Newfoundland may wait a little for their brandy 

 while I catch cod ; " he gets cod, but the moment he began to do that 

 he began to have his vessel hovering off the coast in contravention 

 of, and disobedience to, the hovering Acts by which Newfoundland, 

 like every other civilized state, protects its revenue. The moment he 



began to do that they would say : " If you are going to treat 

 1157 your trading rights in that way we begin to suspect that you 



want to put your brandy off in the night and you will never 

 come to port with your brandy at all ; you will catch your cod, smug- 

 gle your brandy, and go back." Therefore, Newfoundland would be 

 compelled to say : " We withdraw your trading rights the moment 

 you begin to fish, not because we object to your catching a few cod, 

 but because the moment you begin to fish you begin to hover, you 

 begin sailing about our coasts and ports and bays, and we will sus- 

 pect your intention. You may be the most innocent man with the 

 most innocent intentions; you may not have brandy on board, but 

 only stockings; you may be delaying because you enjoy the fresh air 

 of our territorial waters; your motives may be most admirable, but 

 we cannot stop to enquire into your motives; you have your ship's 

 papers, but they do not tell us the ethical quality of your captain 

 and crew from the revenue point of view, and therefore we will not 

 allow you to hang about here and your trading rights must go." 

 Would not Newfoundland come within its rights, would not New- 

 foundland be acting within its duties and according to its duties? 

 Mr. Elder and the United States know that they cannot call upon 

 this Tribunal, directly or indirectly, to give any judgment which 

 shall appear, or affect to confer trading rights upon them. 



What is the right they want ? Mr. Elder was quite candid about 

 it. He wanted the right to buy bait. There is no secret. Look 

 at what that means. These two States, Newfoundland and the 

 United States, have been engaged, as we know, in one of those de- 

 plorable fiscal conflicts that are injurious to both, and most injurious, 

 of course, to the smaller State. I have already dealt with that 

 circumstance. Mr. Elder, I do not think, laid quite sufficient stress 

 upon it. In the speeches from which he cited, Sir Robert Bond 

 makes his position perfectly celar, that he felt it his duty to fight 

 against bounties and closed ports. Look at p. 424 of the Appendix 

 to the Counter-Case of the United States and you will find the speech 

 from which Mr. Elder cited some passages. I will just read one 

 or two words to show what Sir Robert Bond's position was. Let 

 us see whether it is fair that his fiscal policy should be circumvented, 

 because that is the object of Question 7. Sir Robert Bond says : 



" For fifteen years, by a free and generous policy toward our 

 fisher friends of the New England States, we have endeavored to 

 show them that in our desire to secure a measure of reciprocal trade 

 92909" S. Doc. 870, 61-3, vol 11 22 



