2160 NORTH ATLANTIC COAST FISHERIES ARBITRATION. 



was for the interest of England to extend the radius of the opera- 

 tions of her naval vessels clear to the verge of every coast and into 

 every bay in the known world, to free them from all >harkli'S in 

 action; and it was for the interests of the United St:itr> to push 

 away from her coasts these hovering war-ships that frightened and 

 drove away the commerce upon which she was growing rich. 



I join most heartily in the expression of a kindlier judgment upon 

 the actions which were brought about by the exigencies of that ter- 

 rible struggle; but in those days they were bitter for the people of 

 the United States. The United States was urging relief, and Groat 

 Britain was insisting upon full and unfettered opportunity for her 

 policy. 



It is a mistake to look upon the questions that we have here in 

 the light only of Canadian or Nova Scotian or Newfoundland in- 

 terests. They were part of a great world-wide empire and the 

 policy that Great Britain followed was the policy of the empire. My 

 learned friend has drawn a picture of the inconvenience, the dan<rrr. 

 the alarm which would be created by permitting the shelter of a fleet 

 of war-ships in Chaleur or Miramichi in any of the bays of these 

 dominions. True, that is the Canadian view ; a natural view for the 

 inhabitants of these colonies. But, how convenient for the war- 

 ships! How necessary, perhaps, to their operations, on which the 

 fate of empire might depend! That is the British view. Great 

 Britain was needing sheltering bays on every sea, and therefore the 

 policy of empire required that Great Britain should resist the 

 urgency of the United States to withdraw from the general use of the 

 navies of the world, and appropriate to special jurisdiction the 

 chambers within headlands, and a broad strip of territorial zone. 

 That is why England made no claim, and acceded to no proposal for 

 the appropriation of these bodies of water. Justice requires me to 

 assert that in those early days Great Britain never neglect e<l the 

 duty of claiming what she wanted. She refrained from claiming 

 jurisdiction over Fundy and Chaleur and Miramichi and Placentia 

 and Fortune Bays, because, more than she wanted that 

 1306 jurisdiction she wanted to be free from the jurisdiction of other 

 nations upon other bays all over the world. 



I now pass to the proposition that Great Britain has always main- 

 tained the same policy and does to this day. 



SIR CHARLES FITZPATRICK: Was not the doctrine of the King's 

 Chambers essentially an English doctrine? 



SENATOR ROOT: Ah, yes, it was, essentially an English doctrine. 

 In the early times, when nations were isolated, and protecting them- 

 selves against the others, then arose the doctrine of the King's 

 Chambers; then arose these claims to sovereignty over closed seas. 

 But, with the new era of commercial freedom, which began in that 



