APPENDICES TO ORAL ARGUMENTS. 2365 



Our resistance to these invasions became the more difficult because, 

 while the island saw its population and its requirements increase, the 

 number of our fishermen frequenting the French shore diminished 

 year by year. From 10,000, the number of fishermen in the middle 

 of the last century, it decreased to 400 or 500, until it reached last 

 year scarcely 238. For the benefit of these few fishermen, and for 

 the few weeks in the year which they devoted to fishing in these 

 regions, the inhabitants of the country saw access to and enjoyment 



of almost half the coast of the island forbidden to them. 

 1426 It was this state of things, impatiently borne, which caused 

 the Parliament of Newfoundland to reject the arrangements 

 concluded between the Cabinets at Paris and at London in 1857 and 

 1885 for the purpose of bringing about a compromise between the 

 rigour of ancient treaties and the exigencies of the present situation. 



The latter of these agreements contained a stipulation which 

 accorded to us the right of purchasing bait, that is, herring, capelin, 

 squid, &c., necessary for the cod fishery. This was the reason which 

 induced the Parliament at St. John's to reject the arrangement of 

 1885. In the following year they even voted the Bait Act, the object 

 of which was to forbid the sale of bait to foreigners. This law 

 ceased provisionally to be enforced from 1893 on, but the Newfound- 

 land Parliament in 1898 imposed a tax upon the sale of bait, which, 

 in default of an express stipulation, it was feared might be applied 

 along the French shore. 



At the same time, with the question raised by the Bait Act, a new 

 element of conflict arose by reason of an industry of recent origin in 

 Newfoundland that of the lobster fishery, the exercise of which on 

 our part on the French shore was contested because the lobster was 

 a crustacean and the stipulations of the Treaty of Utrecht had in 

 view -fish only. In 1890 a 'modus vivendi was arranged on the basis 

 of the state of affairs existing on the 1st July, 1889. This arrange- 

 ment, essentially temporary, and first limited to the season of 1890, 

 was, in default of a better, renewed thereafter, at times under great 

 difficulty. A refusal on the part of the Parliament of Newfoundland 

 would have sufficed to bring about inextricable complications. 



In this situation the urgent necessity was imposed of seeking a 

 definitive solution. Our rights in Newfoundland were composed of 

 two elements; the fishery, that is to say, the use of the territorial 

 waters, and the drying of fish, that is, the use of the shore. By 

 reason of its exclusive character, this latter right had become unbear- 

 able to the inhabitants. We consent to abandon it. But it must 

 be observed that the circumstances are no longer the same as in the 

 time of the treaty of Utrecht, the drying being possible and being 

 actually carried on either on board ship or, thanks to the rapidity of 

 communication, at St. Pierre or Miquelon, or even in France. On 

 the other hand, our right of fishing in territorial waters, which is 

 the essential thing, remains intact. With reference to the fishery 

 on the Grand Banks, which is infinitely more productive and, con- 

 sequently, more sought after, this is facilitated by the right which is 

 henceforth guaranteed to us to purchase bait along the entire extent 

 of the French shore. It is precisely this deep sea fishery which the 

 Government has always sought to encourage as one of the most use- 

 ful schools for our seamen and a valuable preparation for naval 

 training. 



