2374 NORTH ATLANTIC COAST FISHERIES ARBITRATION. 



This letter and the accompanying list are printed in the Appendix 

 to the Counter-Case of the United States. This list of acts after- 

 wards became the subject of correspondence between yourself, as 

 agent for the United States, and Mr. Aylesworth, the agent for 

 Great Britain, under dates of the 6th August, 1909, 22nd October, 

 1909, and 26th October, 1909. In your letter of the 22nd October, 

 1909, to Mr. Aylesworth, you say : 



" I have the honour to inform you that if It becomes necessary to bring up 

 for discussion the acts specified on the part of the United States, It is not 

 anticipated that there will be occasion to go beyond the particular sections or 

 clauses thereof, which are printed in the Appendix to the Case of the United 

 States, delivered on October 4 last, pursuant to the provisions of Article VI of 

 the Special Agreement referred to." 



In the opening argument of counsel for Great Britain on the 14th 

 June, reference was made to article 2 of the special agreement and 

 to the fact that, "in accordance with that article, a list had been 

 handed in"; and p. 5 of the Appendix to the Case of Great Britain 

 was refered to for a list of the Acts objected to by the United States. 

 This list corresponds exactly with the list published in the Appendix 

 to the Counter-Case of the United States above mentioned. 



After this statement, and a reference to the correspondence be- 

 tween the Secretary of State for the United States and the British 

 Ambassador, counsel for Great Britain, Sir Robert Finlay, made the 

 following statements : 



" So that the consent which is of course necessary for international arbitra- 

 tion has been given in so far as all cases up to date are concerned." 



And after quoting article 4 of the special agreement, he proceeds 

 as follows: 



"So that, most fortunately, we have the most complete provision. contained 

 In this treaty, first, for dealing with any acts which already have been passed, 

 and which are complained of, and secondly, for legislating in future in accord- 

 . ance with the principles to be laid down by this Tribunal. The award of the 

 Tribunal on this occasion will be a very worthy one. for it will not only solve 

 the differences which have already occurred, but will provide the principles 

 and a method of procedure for disposing of any question which may arise in 

 the future with regard to the application of those principles to any particular 

 enactment" 



As to these statements, no objection or criticism was made by coun- 

 sel for the United States. Afterwards, as will appear by Protocol 

 XXXVT of the 5th August, a request was made by the Tribunal of 

 the agents and counsel for the respective parties for the designation 

 by each of them of a member of the commission of expert specialists 

 under the provisions of article 3 of the special agreement. By Pro- 

 tocol XXVI of the 19th July, to which you refer, it is said: 



In pursuance of the provisions of Article II of the Special Agreement of the 

 27th of January, 1909, both parties have called the attention of the Tribunal to 

 different legislative and executive acts of the other party for the purpose of 

 asking the Tribunal to point out in what respects, if any, they are inconsistent 

 with the true interpretation of the treaty." 



And in your letter you say : 



"Nevertheless, as the United States intended to do what the Tribunal sup- 

 posed to have been already done, viz., to call the attention of the Tribunal to 

 certain acts of the other party which had been specified within three months of 

 the exchange of notes enforcing the agreement, it was not deemed important to 

 take note of the misapprehension on the part of the Tribunal." 



