AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 1565 



the amount of compensation, the decision, even if adverse, mast prevail ; 

 and I beg to say I trust whatever it may be it will be accepted in the 

 proper spirit. 



Mr. WHITEWAY. I was rather taken by surprise when I learned but 

 just now that the main question in this proposition was this day to be 

 discussed, and not the preliminary question as to whether the main 

 question should be argued at the present time, or as part of the final 

 argument. I have now only a few observations to make in addition to 

 those that have been so strongly put by the learned counsel who have 

 preceded me. It seems to me that the position taken by the learned 

 counsel on the opposite side to-day differs materially, and in fact is 

 diametrically opposed to that taken by them in their answer. In their 

 answer they not only allege on the part of the United States that they 

 have a right to those incidental advantages which may accrue from the 

 concession of a right to fish ; but they go further, and they allege that 

 they have a right to claim for the incidental benefits which may flow to 

 the subjects of Her Britannic Majesty from traffic with American fisher- 

 men, and they allege this as a specific ground for the reduction of the 

 amount claimed on behalf of Great Britain. Now, at page 13, part iv, 

 of the answer, they say : 



It is next proposed to consider the advantages derived by British subjects from the 

 provisions of the Treaty of Washington. 



In the first place, the admission of American fishermen into British waters is no det- 

 riment, but a positive advantage, to colonial fishermen ; they catch more fish, make 

 more money, aud are improved in all their material circumstances by the presence of 

 foreign fishermen. The large quantities of the best bait thrown over from American 

 vessels attract myriads of fish, so that Canadians prefer to fish side by side with them ; 

 and when doing so make a larger catch than they otherwise could. The returns of the 

 product of the British fisheries conclusively show that the presence of foreign fisher- 

 men cannot possibly have done them any injury. 



Secondly. The incidental benefits arising from traffic with American fishermen are of vital 

 importance to the inhabitants of the British maritime provinces. 



The incidental benefits arising from traffic, therefore, are, according 

 to the contention of our learned friends, to be taken into consideration, 

 and to have weight with the Commissioners in reducing those damages 

 which they may award to the British Government. Now, all that has 

 been contended for on the part of Great Britain up to the present time 

 ig that the value of the incidental advantages which necessarily arise 

 from the concession of the right to take fish within the three-mile limit, 

 and to land for the purpose or curing, should be taken into considera- 

 tion by the Commission. 



On page 9 of the answer they say : 



It is further important to bear in mind that the fishery claims of the Treaty of Wash- 

 ington have already been in formal operation during four years, one-third of the whole 

 period of their continuance, while practically both fishing and commercial intercourse 

 have been carried on in conformity with the treaty ever since it was signed, May 8, 1871. 



Here they say that practically both fishing and commercial intercourse 

 have been carried on in conformity with the treaty ever since 1871. Now, 

 then, if you will turn to the same answer, page 13, they say : 



The United States call upon the British Agent to produce, and upon the Commis- 

 sioners to require at his bands, tangible evidence of the actual practical value of the 

 privilege of fishing, by Americans, in British territorial waters, as it has existed under the 

 treaty for four years past, as it exists to-day, and as, judging of the future by the past, it may 

 reasonably be expected to continue during the ensuing eight years embraced in the treaty. 



We have met their views, and given evidence of the actual practical 

 value of the privilege of fishing and its incidents of commercial inter- 

 course as actually carried on in conformity with the treaty. 



Now, your excellency and your honors, it appears to me very unfor- 



i 



