ARGUMENT OF ELIHU ROOT. 2219 



THE PRESIDENT: Perhaps it is convenient ^o adjourn now and 

 continue at 2 o'clock. The Court adjourns until 2 o'clock. 



[Thereupon, at 12 o'clock, the Tribunal took a recess until 2 

 o'clock p. m.] 



AFTERNOON SESSION, FRIDAY, AUGUST 12, 1910, 2 P. M. 



THE PRESIDENT : Will you kindly continue, Mr. Senator Root? 

 SENATOR ROOT: As to Question 6: 



" Have the inhabitants of the United States the liberty under the 

 said Article or otherwise to take fish in the bays, harbors, and creeks 

 on that part of the southern coast of Newfoundland which extends 

 from Cape Ray to Rameau Islands, or on the western and northern 

 coasts of Newfoundland from Cape Ray to Quirpon Islands, or on 

 the Magdalen Islands?" 



I wish merely to point out the historical origin of the use of the 

 word "coasts" in the treaty of 1783 to describe the fishing right 

 granted by that treaty to inhabitants of the United States. 



As I have suggested in the argument upon another question, the 

 preliminary articles of peace agreed upon by the British and Ameri- 

 can negotiators in 1782 were made subject to and not to take effect 

 until the conclusion of the treaty of peace between Great Britain and 

 France, the ally of the United States in the then existing war; the 

 definitive treaties of peace between Great Britain and the United 

 States and between Great Britain and France were parts in effect of 

 the same transaction, the treaty between Great Britain and the 

 United States being limited according to the recital of its preamble 

 to the conclusion of the French treaty. 



I have already pointed out that both the treaty of the 3rd Sep- 

 tember, 1783, with the United States, and the treaty of the same day 

 and forming part of the same general settlement between Great Bri- 

 tain and France, treated of the fishery rights upon this same coast: 

 and the treaty dealing with those rights granted to Americans, 

 1342 naturally employed the same words, the same forms of ex- 

 pression, which were found in the pre-existing treaty between 

 Great Britain and France granting the same rights upon the same 

 coast, and said the inhabitants of the United States should have 

 liberty to take fish on the coast of Newfoundland, as that pre-existing 

 treaty said the subjects of the French King should have the liberty 

 to take fish on the coast of Newfoundland, and the words, the form of 

 expression, must be deemed to have the same meaning in the grant 

 of that right on that coast to the two different Powers who were 

 concerned in that transaction. 



While Mr. Turner was making his argument, the Court called for 

 or expressed a wish to have the proceedings of the Halifax Commis- 



