AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 1801 



from the walls, I know that our rights have been and are thoroughly 

 understood, and can, if necessary, be bravely upheld and defended in the 

 future as they have been in the past. But I presume the day will never 

 again come when Great Britain will be forced to measure strength with 

 the United States. It is perfectly idle to make use of such language in 

 an inquiry such as this ; and in making these remarks I do not wish to be 

 understood as saying anything that can be considered at all offensive to 

 my friends of the United States ; I make them simply in answer to ob- 

 servations made, as I submit, most unnecessarily by them. 



Mr. Dana's other propositions I will pass over as rapidly as 1 can, 

 consistently. He said we had no territorial waters that DO nation has. 

 He stakes his reputation on that point. 



Mr. DANA. No ; you misunderstood me. 



Mr. THOMSON. On page 67, Mr. Dana says : 



Now, these fishermen should not be excluded except from necessity, some kind of neces- 

 sity, and I am willing to put at stake whatever little reputation I may have as a person ac- 

 quainted with the jurisprudence of nations (and the less reputation, the more important to 

 me), to maintain this proposition, that the deep-sea fisherman, pursuing the free-swimming 

 fish of the ocean with his net, or his leaded line, not touching shores or troubling the 

 bottom of the sea, is no trespasser, though he approach within three miles of a coast, by any 

 established, recognized law of all nations. 



Now, I say that the meaning of that proposition is this, that there are 

 no such things as territorial waters. I say it means that and nothing 

 else. That is a distinct affirmation, that by international law any fisher- 

 man can approach within not merely three miles of the coast, but with- 

 in any distance from the coast, if he keeps his leaded line from touching 

 the bottom, and the keel of his vessel from touching the land, and that 

 no international law excludes him. Upon that extraordinary proposi- 

 tion I take direct and unqualified issue. 



Mr. DANA. What was the proposition to which you refer! 

 ' Mr. THOMSON. The proposition was, that there are no such things as 

 territorial waters. 



Mr. DANA. I made no such proposition. The question was this : Was 

 there among territorial rights the right to exclude fishermen from fish- 

 ing? 



Mr. THOMSON. I did say this, that Mr. Dana had put forward tho 

 proposition that no nation possessed territorial waters. But no doubt 

 that was too broad, because there may be territorial waters so inclosed 

 by land that I presume no question could arise in regard to the m ; there- 

 fore, I stated his proposition too broadly. But Mr. Dana does not con- 

 fine his statement to the one that no nation has absolute territorii 

 rights over waters. He says that any foreign fisherman can come within 

 any distance of the shores, and if he does not allow his leaded line c 

 the keel of his vessel to touch the bottom, he has au undoubted right 

 to fish. 



Mr. DANA. There is no established recognized law of all 

 against it. 



Mr. THOMSON. Mr. Dana says, " by any established, recogn 

 of all nations." I do not wish to have any fencing about words 

 words in their ordinary meaning. 1 presume Mr. Dana means civili 

 nations. I do not suppose he will contend that, if the civilized 

 of Europe and America had recognized a doctrine totally differen 

 that enunciated by him, but the King of Ashautee, or i 

 other potentate away off in the interior of the vast contmen 

 and Africa had not acceded to that doctrine, it was not, there 

 law of nations. I presume he refers to the civilized nations, 

 show the Commission that the proposition submitted by .Mr. L 



