AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 1831 



the affidavit of the British witnesses from Prince Edward Island, that 

 they had been made on the assumption that the three-mile line was a 

 line outside a line drawn from East Point to North Caj>e. Now, there 

 is no evidence of that. There is no evidence that the Bend of Prince 

 Edward Island was ever claimed to be a bay from East Point to North 

 Cape. 



Mr. FOSTER. Yes, there was. 



Mr. THOMSON. At all events you can find in no ofticial correspond 

 ence any such view, and I do not, as counsel for iler Majesty's Govern- 

 ment, present any such view now. I refer to this matter because, based 

 on that theory, Mr. Foster made what I think was an unfair charge 

 against the Prince Edward Island affidavits. He says in his speech, 

 page 37 : u The affidavits from Prince Edward Island were drawn upon 

 the theory that that is the rule, and in two or three of these J found it 

 expressly stated, 'that all the mackerel were caught within the three- 

 mile line, that is to say, within a line 3 miles from a straight line drawn 

 from East Point to North Cape.' " 



But there were only two affidavits that could by any possible construc- 

 tion be made to bear such a meaning. 



Mr. FOSTER. Look at McLean's affidavit, page 42. 



Mr. THOMSON. Yes, you referred to him by name. Now let me see 

 what he says, although even if one of them did make his affidavit 

 upon that assumption it would not be a very important mutter. 



Mr. FOSTER. My argument was that they were all made in answer to 

 the same series of questions, and the only possible interpretation of 

 those questions is that such was the view entertained. 



Mr. IHOMSON. These affidavits were drawn up in answer to no ques- 

 tions whatever. There were no questions put to these people. They 

 were substantive affidavits, drawn up, not by one man or by one hand. 



Mr. FOSTER. Compare them, and you will see that every man answers 

 in the same paragraph of the affidavit to the same question. 



Mr. DAVIES. No, that is not the case. 



Mr. FOSTER. Try them. 



Mr. THOMSON. I will try McNeil. He says, in section four of his affi- 

 davit : 



That the fish are nearly all caught close to the shore, the best fishing-ground being 

 about one and one-half miles from the shore. In October the boats sometimes go off 

 than three miles from land. Fully two-thirds of the mackerel are caught within three mi la 

 from the shore, and all are caught within what is known as the three-mile limit : 

 within a line drawn between two points taken three miles off the North Cape and Kiwi 1 

 of this island. 



He draws the distinction at once. He says two-thirds were caught 

 within three miles of the coast, that is, following the contour ot the 

 shore; but if you are going to draw a line from point to paint, and take 

 the three-mile line as a line outside of that, then they were all caugh 

 within that line. But you see that, for the purpose of our case, the tact 

 that two-thirds were caught within three miles of the contour ot 

 coast, is all that is necessary. There were only two affidavits, I think, 

 that had any allusion of this kind. 



Mr. FOSTER. See McLeod's affidavits, page 218. 



Mr. THOMSON. In the sixth section of McLeod's affidavit he 



6. That nine-tenths of our mackerel are caught within one and ono-half mil 

 shore, and I may say the whole of them are caught within three mile! 

 may be an odd catch of mackerel got more than three miles from shore, bi 

 often happen. The greater part of the codfish caught by hand-line are c 

 to five miles from the shore, and all the codfish caught by the trawl or . 

 within three miles from the shore. There are no mackerel or codfish at 

 boats outside of the three-mile limit-that is, outside of a line drawn from pou 



