210 CASE OF THE UNITED STATES. 



fishing-vessel being within any port of the coasts of this island, or 

 hovering within British waters within 3 marine miles of any of the 

 coasts, bays, creeks, or harbours in this island, and may bring such 

 foreign fishing-vessel into port, may search her cargo and may 

 examine the master upon oath touching the cargo and voyage, and 

 the master or person in command, shall answer truly such questions 

 as shall be put to him under a penalty not exceeding 500 dollars. 

 And if such foreign fishing-vessel has on board any herring, caplin, 

 squid, or other bait fishes, ice, lines, seines, or other outfits or suj)- 

 plies for the fishery purchased within any port on the coast of this 

 island, or within the distance of 3 marine miles from any coasts, 

 bays, creeks, or harbours of this island, or if the master of the said 

 vessel shall have engaged or attempted to engage any person to form 

 part of the crew of the said vessel in any port or on any part of the 

 coasts of this island, or has entered such waters for any purpose not 

 permitted by Treaty or Convention for the time being in force such 

 vessel and the taclde, rigging, apparel, furniture, stores, and cargo 

 thereof shall be forfeited. 



"Section 3. In any prosecution under this Act the presence on 

 board any foreign fishing-vessel in any port of this island, or within 

 British waters aforesaid of any caplin, squid, or other bait fishes, of 

 ice, lines, seines, or other outfits or supplies for the fishery shall be 

 prima facie evidence of the purchase of the said bait, fishes, and 

 supplies and outfits within such port or waters.'' 



It seems plain that the provisions above quoted constitute a war- 

 rant to the officers named to interfere with and violate the rights of 

 American fishing-vessels under the Treaty of 1818. 



The 1st section authorizes any of the officers named to stop an 

 American vessel wliile fishing upon the Treaty Coast and compel it 

 to leave the fisliing grounds, to prevent it from going to the places 

 where the fish may be, to prevent it departing with the fish which it 

 may have taken, and to detain it for an indefinite period during a 

 search of the cargo and an examination of the master under oath 

 under a heavy penalty. 



It is to be observed that this section does not require that the 

 vessel shall have been charged with any violation of the laws of 

 Newfoundland, or even that she shall have been suspected of having 

 violated the laws of Newfoundland as a condition precedent to com- 

 pelling it to desist from the exercise of its Treaty rights, and virtually 

 seizing it and taldng it into port. In the consideration of this pro- 

 vision, it is unnecessary to discuss any question as to the extent to 

 which American vessels may be interfered with in the exercise of 

 their Treaty rights pursuant to judicial proceedings based upon a 

 charge of violation of law, or even upon reasonable ground to belive 

 that any law has been violated, for the authority of the Acts 

 authorized appears to be part of no such proceeding. 



When we consider that the minor officials named in the Act, 

 invested with tins extraordinary and summary power, are presump- 

 tively members of the fishing communities, in competition with wluch 

 the American fishermen are following their calling, it is plain that in 

 denying the right of the Government of Newfoundland to do what 

 this section provides for we are not merely dealing with a theoretical 

 question, but with the probability of serious injustice. 



