112 CASE OF THE UNITED STATES. 



being in part unsettled, and to provide that the fishermen of the 

 United States should not pursue their occupation witliin three miles 

 of the shores, bays, creeks and harbors of that and other parts of 

 her Majesty's possessions similarly situated. The privilege reserved 

 to American fishermen by the treaty of 1783, of taking fish in all 

 the waters and drying them on all the unsettled portions of the coast 

 of these possessions was accordingly by the convention of 1818 

 restricted as follows : — 



"The United States hereby renounce forever any hbert}^ hereto- 

 fore enjoyed or claimed by the inhabitants thereof, to take, dry, 

 or cure fish on or witliin three marine miles of any of the coasts, 

 bays, creeks, or harbors of liis Britannic Majesty's dominions in 

 America, not included within the above mentioned hmits; provided, 

 however, that the American fishermen shall be admitted to enter 

 such bays or harbors for the purpose of sheltering and repairing 

 damages therein, of purchasing wood, and of obtaining water, and 

 for no other purpose whatever." 



The existing doubt as to the construction of the provision arises 

 from the fact that a broad arm of the sea runs up to the northeast 

 between the provinces of New Brunsmck and Nova Scotia. This 

 arm of the sea being commonly called the Bay of Fundy, though 

 not in reahty possessing all the characters usually imphed by the 

 term "bay," has of late years been claimed by the provincial authori- 

 ties of Nova Scotia to te included among 'Hhe coasts, bays, creeks 

 and harbors" forbidden to American fishermen. 



An examination of the map is sufficient to show the doubtful 

 nature of this construction. It was notoriously the object of the 

 article of the treaty in question to put an end to the difficulties wliich 

 had grown out of the operations of the fishermen from the United 

 States along the coasts and upon the shores of the settled portions 

 of the country, and for that purpose to remove their vessels to a 

 distance not exceeding three miles from the same. In estimating 

 this distance, the imdersigned admits it to be the intent of the treaty, 

 as it is itself reasonable, to have regard to the general fine of the 

 coast; and to consider its bays, creeks and harbors, that is, the inden- 

 tation usually so accounted, as included within that fine. But the 

 undersigned cannot admit it to be reasonable, instead of thus fol- 

 lo-sving the general directions of the coast, to draw a fine from the 

 southwestern-most point of Nova Scotia to the termination of the 

 northeastern boundary between the United States and New Bruns- 

 wick, and to consider the arms of the sea which will thus be cut off, 

 and which cannot, on that line be less than sixty miles wide, as one 

 of the bays on the coast from wliich American vessels are excluded. 

 By this interpretation the fishermen of the United States would be 

 shut out from the waters distant, not three, but thirty miles from 

 any part of the colonial coast. The undersigned cannot perceive 

 that any assignable object of the restriction imposed by" the conven- 

 tion of 1818 on the fishing privilege accorded to the citizens of the 

 United States by the treaty of 1783 requires such a latitude of 

 construction. 



It is obvious that (bj the terms of the treaty) the furthest distance 

 to which fishing vessels of the United States are obho;ed to hold them- 

 selves from the colonial coasts and bays, is three miles. But, owing 

 to the peculiar configuration of these coasts, there is a succession of 



