APPENDIX F 255 



The Tribunal further decides that Article IV of the Agree- 

 ment is, as stated by counsel of the respective parties at the 

 argument, permanent in its effect, and not terminable by the 

 expiration of the General Arbitration Treaty of 1908, between 

 Great Britain and the United States. 



In execution, therefore, of the responsibilities imposed upon 

 this Tribunal in regard to Articles II, III, and IV of the 

 Special Agreement, we hereby pronounce in their regard as 

 follows : — 



As TO Article II. 



Pursuant to the provisions of this Article, either party has 

 called the attention of this Tribunal to acts of the other claimed 

 to be inconsistent with the true interpretation of the Treaty 

 of 1818. 



But in response to a request from the Tribunal ... for an 

 exposition of the grounds of such objections, the parties replied 

 ... to the following effect : — 



His Majesty's Government considered that it would be un- 

 necessary to call upon the Tribunal for an opinion under the 

 second clause of Article II in regard to the executive act of the 

 United States of America in sending warships to the territorial 

 waters in question, in view of the recognized motives of the 

 United States of America in taking this action and of the 

 relations maintained by their representatives with the local 

 authorities. And this being the sole act to which the attention 

 of this Tribunal has been called by his Majesty's Government, 

 no further action in their behalf is required from this Tribunal 

 under Article II. 



The United States of America presented a statement in which 

 their claim that specific provisions of certain legislative and 

 executive acts of the Governments of Canada and Newfoundland 

 were inconsistent with the true interpretation of the Treaty of 

 1 8 18 was based on the contention that these provisions were not 

 ' reasonable ' within the meaning of Question I. 



After calUng upon this Tribunal to express an opinion on 

 these acts, . . . the United States of America pointed out in that 

 statement that under Article III any question regarding the 

 reasonableness of any regulation might be referred by the 

 Tribunal to a Commission of expert specialists, and expressed 

 an intention of asking for such reference under certain circum- 

 stances. 



The Tribunal ... is of opinion that the decision on the 

 reasonableness of these regulations requires expert information 

 about the fisheries themselves and an examination of the 

 practical effect of a great number of these provisions in relation 

 to the conditions surrounding the exercise of the liberty of 



