AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 1803 



your attention to Wheaton on International Law, page 320. This lan- 

 guage is used : 



The maritime territory of every Stafte extends to the ports, harbors, bays, mouth* of 

 rivers, and adjacent parts of the sea inclosed by headlands, belonging to the gam*' State. 

 The general usage of nations superadds to this extent of territorial jurisdiction A distant . 

 of a marine league, or as far as a cannon shot will reach from the shore along all the coaaU 

 of the State. Within these limits its rights of property and territorial jurisdiction are 

 absolute, and exclude those of every other nation. 



Mark the emphatic language of this great writer on international 

 law: 



" Within these limits its rigltts of property and territorial jurisdiction are aLtolutr." 



He declares that no right to interfere with these limits in any way is 

 possessed by other people or by other classes of people. If fishermen 

 had the right to approach within these limits of territorial jurisdiction 

 which extend to the distance of three marine miles from the coast, no 

 English speaking writer on international law would use the term here 

 employed, and say that every nation whose coasts are surrounded by 

 these territorial waters has such an absolute right. Under such cir- 

 cumstances, the author would have used the term " qualified right"; 

 and supposing that fishermen were the only class to be allowed within 

 these waters, he would say at once that " these nations have this right 

 against all the world, except fishermen, who undoubtedly have the right 

 to fish within those waters if they do not touch the land with the lend 

 of their fishing-lines or with the keels of their vessels"; but no one has 

 so written, and this very accurate author, who is quoted with approba 

 tion by English and continental writers on international law, states 

 that 



Within these limits its rights of property and territorial jurisdiction are abs luto, an 1 ex- 

 clude those of every other nation. 



This language, I repeat, is emphatic, and I am glad that it is the 

 language of an American writer, because I presume that it will in con- 

 sequence have greater weight with Mr. Dana. 



Mr. DANA. I would like to ask my learned friend whether he would 

 himself be willing to adopt that language and say that these rights of 

 property are absolute. 



Mr. THOMSON. Yes; I have seen no decision which in any way quali- 

 fies that, unless it can be said that the case of the Queen r. Keyn (which 

 is quoted against us in the American brief, and reviewed at some length 

 in the British brief in reply) qualifies it. To that case, it will become 

 iny duty to refer by and by. 



Mr. Wheatou further states that " the general usage of nations super 

 adds to this extent of territorial jurisdiction a distance of a marine 

 league, or as far as a cannon shot will reach from the shore along all the 

 coasts of the state/' 



Now, I say that the propositions of international law thus laid dow 

 by this very eminent American writer are entirely at variance with the 

 doctrine laid down by Mr. Dana. 



Mr. Dana has put to me a question which I am quite wil 

 answer. It is this: Whether or no I would myself, if writing on 

 subject, use such language as that and say that a nation has excln 

 right of property within its territorial waters! 



Mr. DANA. Absolute right. 



Mr. THOMSON, Yes; absolute right of property; with t 

 ception which is, of course, understood by all writers on the * 

 that the ships of other nations have the right to pass throi 

 those waters for innocent purposes, and in cases of storm to t 



