1548 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 



ment, call upon this Commission to say this is an improper time for that 

 purpose. We have no objection that this application on the part of the 

 counsel of the United States Government should be heard at length, 

 and so they may be enabled to understand at all times, on all reason- 

 able occasions, the exact ground upon which we stand. There is noth- 

 ing unreasonable in the view which has been put forward by them in 

 this respect. They are entitled to know whether the Commission is 

 going to take the matter named in their notice of motion into considera- 

 tion or not. We therefore have no objection that your excellency and 

 jour honors should determine this point at once, and we do not com- 

 plain of the time at which the motion is made. I shall now come to the 

 substance of the motion. The Agent of the United States has traveled 

 out of the record, and has referred to light-bouses and other matters not 

 contained in this motion. He also alluded to the injuries which were 

 committed on our coasts by the American fishermen, and he says that 

 we have put them all forward in our case as subjects for compensation. 

 I am not here now to consider the question whether we have done so or 

 not; 1 at present only intend to discuss whether the matters included 

 in this motion are matters coming within the jurisdiction of this court 

 or not. I read the motion. It states: 



The counsel and Agent of the United States ask the honorable Commissioners to rale 

 declaring that it is not competent for this Commission to award any compensation for 

 commercial intercourse between the two countries, and that the advantages resulting 

 from th practice of purchasing bait, ice, supplies, &.c.. and from being allowed to 

 transship cargoes in British waters, do not constitute any foundation for au award of 

 compensation, and shall be wholly excluded from the consideration of this tribunal. 



The tribunal will see that these are the words inviting discussion; 

 and these I am here to answer, and nothing else. Satisfactory answers 

 could be given to the other matters to which Mr. Foster has called 

 attention, if this were the proper time to give them. As to the light- 

 houses, for instance, it is quite obvious that these make the value of 

 the fisheries themselves very much greater to the Americans than they 

 would be otherwise; but I say again that I am not going to discuss 

 that question now. If it should arise hereafter, I shall do so. We shall 

 undoubtedly be obliged to discuss it eventually, at the end of the case; 

 the question now is, whether it Jails within the jurisdiction of this 

 anal to award to Great Britain any pecuniary compensation for the 

 i which the Americans have undoubtedly exercised since the 

 ington Treaty was negotiated, of coming into our waters and 

 stead <>f taking bait with their own lines and nets, as by the terms of 

 treaty they have a right to do, purchasing it trom our citizens; of 

 ; ice here as well, and of getting supplies and transshipping their 

 s said in the Reply of Her Majesty, page 8, I think, that 

 rilegeiJ are clearly incidental; that, looking at the whole scope 

 g of the treaty, it is clear that these are incidental privileges 

 the American Government can afford to pay. The words of 

 our reply, read by Mr. Foster, are these: 



Ilv tin 

 If"" 

 the 



liberty 

 Her Maj68ty ' 8 Government contend 



. 



I th, ,,rivi|,. K ,.M wer not enjoyed nnder the Convention of 1818, and 



that they are enjoyed under the Treaty of Washington. 



Well, that is the argument which was put forward by Her Majesty's 

 tovernment, but whether that argument commends itself to the judg- 



