AKGUMENT OF ELIHU ROOT. 2227 



jected to the kind of supervision which is appropriate to a trading- 

 vessel. What my learned friend said about hovering is covered by 

 that perfectly. A vessel going to the coast to trade cannot hover. 

 If she is going to trade, she must clear from her home port for a 

 specified port. Every one of these registered vessels has to do that. 

 She must clear for a specified port, she must not deviate from her 

 voyage, she must go to that port, and go directly to the port. She 

 cannot stop, she cannot hover, she must go to the port and she must 

 make entry, and she must subject herself to those regulations and 

 provisions of law which are appropriate to the supervision of trad- 

 ing-vessels. The real question is whether when the vessel has dis- 

 charged it function as a trading-vessel, and is completely through, it 

 can then abandon its trading function and take a cargo for the re- 

 turn voyage by catching fish. 



That is what the practical question comes down to. There is no 

 question about the mingling of the two at the same time. And I re- 

 peat that it was a matter of considerable surprise that Great Britain 

 should have wished to include this question in the list that was sub- 

 mitted to the Tribunal. It is explained by these letters and tele- 

 grams passing between the Government of Newfoundland and the 

 Government of Great Britain, to which I have now referred, but 

 which, at the time, we did not know of. 



JUDGE GRAY : It does not give the trading- vessel, does it, Mr. Root, 

 the right to buy bait if there is a statute forbidding the sale of bait 

 to any foreign vessels, registered or fishing? 



SENATOR ROOT : Certainly not. No such question is raised here. I 

 wish again to put in a guard against waiving or giving up any pos- 

 sible consequences of your agreeing with the British theory of our 

 rights, as a result of your decision on Question 1. It is possible, if 

 you go with the British view under Question 1 and say that our ex- 

 ercise of the right is a matter so common with the exercise of the 

 right of the Newfoundlanders that we must be subject to the same 

 right of restriction and modification that they are subject to, you 

 must also say that we must have, as we insist, all the privileges and 

 opportunities that are connoted by the obligation. 



SIR CHARLES FITZPATRICK : That does not arise here. 



SENATOR ROOT: I wish always, in what I say about the effect of 

 this question to file a caveat against being understood as saying or 

 implying that that may not be a consequence of your Award under 

 Question 1. But this question does not in any degree whatever touch 

 the question whether Newfoundland can be compelled to trade with 

 us, or whether Newfoundland is not perfectly at liberty to prohibit 

 the export of any particular article or prohibit the sale of any 

 particular article. It merely goes to the question as to whether 

 a vessel of the United States which is authorised to trade is, by 



