ARGUMENT OF ELIHU BOOT. 2035 



had before them the fact that for more than a hundred years, on this 

 very coast, the French had exercised the right of fishing granted in 

 the same words, and never subject to regulation by the laws of Great 

 Britain; never. 



And, with that before them, is it credible that they conceived that 

 there would be an implication of such a right on the part of Great 

 Britain? With that before them is it credible that, if they had in- 

 tended or supposed that there was to be such a reservation, they 

 would not have expressed it? Would they not have followed this 

 universal custom, and expressed it? 



Now I ~beg you to observe, regarding the French right, that for 

 seventy years before the treaty of 1783, France exercised this right. 

 Before any declaration of 1783 France exercised the right, first under 

 the Treaty of Utrecht, which said the French citizens shall be 

 allowed, and then under the Treaty of Paris of 1763, which said the 

 " subjects of France shall have the liberty of fishing." 



Everybody knew, these negotiators knew, the question during that 

 seventy years was not whether Great Britain could regulate France, 

 but whether Great Britain had any right at all on the coast, whether 

 France could not exclude Great Britain. Of course they knew that. 

 This treaty of 1778 between the United States and France treats the 

 French right as exclusive. 



It is suggested here that these gentlemen had forgotten it. For- 

 gotten the great event of the French Alliance ! Forgotten that com- 

 pact which alone enabled the United States to secure its independ- 

 ence ! The two great facts that stood out in American history for 

 everyone who approached the subject of diplomacy were the treaty 

 of 1778 with France and the treaty of peace of 1783 with Great 

 Britain. 



The whole history of the French right is very fully displayed in 

 the letter of Lord Salisbury, of 9th July, 1889, which appears in the 

 United States Case Appendix, p. 1083. In that letter Lord Salisbury 

 argues to M. Waddington, not for the British right to control the 

 French fishery, but for the British right to participate in it. He 

 says, in the third paragraph on p. 1083 : 



" In my note of the 24th August, 1887, relative to this claim, I had 

 stated that the right of fishery conferred on the French citizens by 

 the Treaty of Utrecht did not take away, but only restricted during 

 ?i certain portion of the year and on, certain parts of the coast, the 

 British right of fishery inherent in the sovereignty of the island. 

 And in my subsequent note of the 28th July last I observed that the 

 right of British subjects to fish concurrently with French citizens has 

 never been surrendered, though the British fishermen are prohibited 

 by the second paragraph of the Declaration of Vepsailles from inter- 

 rupting in any manner by their competition the fishery of the French 

 during the temporary exercise of it which is granted to them." 



