64 CASE OF THE UNITED STATES. 



It is not to be supposed that the British Plenipotentiaries inserted 

 the words " in common " in this article for any purpose other than 

 to negative the presumption, which otherwise might have arisen, that 

 the American fishermen in the exercise of the fishing liberties reserved 

 to them by the treaty were at liberty to take precedence over the 

 British fishermen in those waters or crowd out the British fishermen 

 from the fishing grounds, the possibility of which, it will be remem- 

 bered. Lord Bathurst informed Mr. Adams was the chief reason for 

 objecting to the admission of American fishermen to those waters." 

 In any event, however, it is not permissible to attribute to these 

 words inserted by the British Plenipotentiaries any unusual meaning 

 which was not disclosed to the American Plenipotentiaries at the 

 time of the negotiations. 



The third point of difference between the provisions above quoted 

 of the treaty of 1783 and the new treaty is found in the specification 

 of the bays, harbors, and creeks wherein the liberty of drying and 

 curing fish may be exercised by the American fishermen, " the un- 

 settled bays, harbors and creeks of Nova Scotia, Magdalen Islands 

 and Labrador " being specified in the earlier treaty, and " the unset- 

 tled bays, harbors and creeks of the southern part of the coast of 

 Newfoundland here above described and of the coast of Labrador" 

 being specified in the new treaty. In both treaties alike it is provided 

 that so soon as the same or any portion thereof (in the earlier treaty 

 " or either of them ") shall be settled, it shall not be lawful for the 

 said fishermen to dry or cure fish at such portion so settled (in the 

 earlier treaty " at such settlements ") without previous agreement for 

 that purpose with the inhabitants, proprietors or possessors of the 

 ground. Here again, as in the case of the differences first noted 

 between the provisions of these two paragraphs, the only effect of the 

 differences here noted is to change the locality wherein the liberty 

 referred to is to be exercised by the American fishermen without 

 changing the character or tenure of such liberty. 



Passing now to the remaining provisions of the fisheries article of 

 the new treaty, it will be found that there are no corresponding pro- 

 visions in the fisheries article of the earlier treaty with which to 

 compare them, the obvious reason being that the purpose of the new 

 provisions was to renounce certain liberties theretofore enjoyed or 

 claimed by the inhabitants of the United States under the provisions 



" Supra, pp. 33, 34. 



