AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 1807 



pered by any such agreement; and if this novel law be correct, an Mr. 

 Dana lays it down, then beyond a doubt we have a right to tish on their 

 coast anywhere we please. There can be no doubt about that at all. It 

 belongs to the law of nations, says Mr. Dana, that, as long as our leaded 

 line does not touch bottom, and our vessel's keel touches no sand beneath 

 the water, we have the undoubted right to go there and fish ; but I am 

 very much afraid that the Americans would treat us to some of their 

 torpedoes if we were so to go down there, and explode us out of those 

 waters in a very short time ; and I think that we would, under such cir- 

 cumstances, have very scant sympathy from the civilized world. What 

 does Mr. Dana, or the other counselin this case, mean by raising this 

 question ? A number of the observations made by Mr. Dana, in the course 

 of his speech, I could understand would well become the hustings. I 

 could well understand, that in a speech before a legislative assembly, 

 having a jurisdiction over the matter, for the purpose of getting such as- 

 sembly to alter the law, he might advance such reasons and argument 

 to show why the law should be altered ; but are we not now met the 

 very point which has been forgotten by some of the counsel to de^er- 

 mine the relative values of reciprocal privileges bestowed on each nation 

 by the Treaty of 1871 ? Is not that treaty the charter under which you 

 sit; and does not that expressly admit that we have this three-mile 

 limit I And have not the Americans accepted all our terms ? They got 

 permission, by that treaty, to enter these limits ; and you are here to as- 

 sess the damages which they ought to pay to Great Britain for having 

 that right extended to them. Why are these questions raised at all ! 



I must now refer to some language employed by Mr. Dana, which, I 

 hope, he used unadvisedly. I am not going to say a harsh word at all ; 

 but, I confess, it struck me that a great deal of what he said was out of 

 place; and I only refer to it for the reason which I stated at the outset, 

 that I cannot pass by these observations without notice, lest it should 

 be said hereafter that they were put forth by a man of high reputation at 

 the United States bar, and therefore advanced seriously on behalf of the 

 United States, and that Great Britain stood here, represented by her 

 counsel, and never dissented from these views. Let me now say what 

 they are. I will first take one expression which he uses on page %. 

 He says : 



But there were great difficulties attending the exercise of this right of exclusion very 

 great difficulties. There always have been, there always will be, and I pray there alwy 

 shall be such, until there be free fishing as well as free trade in tish. 



Now, I hope that my learned friend Mr. Dana used that language un- 

 advisedly. If Mr. Dana had been a member of a high commission ap- 

 pointed to settle upon new treaties between two countries two great 

 and Christian countries, as Mr. Foster characterized Great Britain and 

 the United States this language might then be used, and he might then 

 pray that the time would come when there should be no such exclusion ; 

 but I think it is a very different thing when the law stands as it does, 

 fixed, and as yet unaltered and unalterable for the next seven or eigh 

 years, to employ this dangerous and incendiary language. I use the ten 

 incendiary in this way : I fear that this language will come to the < 

 and be read by the eyes of a class of men whom the evidence laid 

 your excellency and your honors, if it be not entirely untrue, showi 

 not always the most peaceable and law-abiding citizens to be fou 

 this world. Those fishermen are sometimes rather lawless men 

 they find language such as this used by the lips of a learned 

 nent counsel of the United States, they may say at once : 

 United States doctrine, and they will back us up. and i 



