218 CASE OF THE UNITED STATES. 



of American fishing-vessels in Newfoundland waters have in the past 

 been of such a character as to make it impossible, from the point of 

 view of the protection of the Colonial revenue, to exempt such vessels 

 from the supervision authorized by the Colonial Customs Law. 



His Majesty's Government now turn to that part of Mr. Root's note 

 which deals with ''The Foreign Fishing- Vessels Act, 1905." 



His Majesty's Government would have viewed wdth the strongest 

 disapproval any disposition on the part of the Colonial authorities to 

 administer this Act in a manner not consistent with His Majesty's 

 Treaty obligations, but they are confident that the United States' 

 Government will readily admit that the fears expressed on this head 

 in Mr. Root's note have not been realized. 



They desire, however, to point out that, though the Act in question 

 was passed to give effect to the decision of the Colonial Government 

 to withdraw from American fishing- vessels the privileges which they 

 had been allowed to enjoy for many years previously of purchasing 

 bait and supplies and of engaging crews in the ports of the Colony, the 

 provisions objectionable to the United States' Government which it 

 embodies are in no sense new. They will be found in ''The Foreign 

 Fishing-Vessels Act, 1893." The present Act differs from the earlier 

 Act in that it takes away, by omission, from the Colonial Government 

 the power conferred upon them by the earlier Act of authorizing the 

 issue of licences to foreign fishing- vessels for the enjoyment of the 

 privileges mentioned. Allowing for this change, the provisions of the 

 two Acts are in all essential respects identical. The provisions as to 

 boarding, bringing into port, and searching appear in both Acts, and 

 also the provisions as to the possession of bait, outfits, and supplies 

 being primd facie evidence of the purchase of the same in the Colonial 

 jurisdiction, except that in the earlier Act there was a further pro- 

 vision, consequential on the authority which it conferred on the 

 Colonial Government to issue licences, directing that the failure or 

 refusal to produce a license should be yi^imd facie evidence of the 

 purchase of such articles without a licence. The position of any 

 American fishing-vessel choosing to fish for herself on the Treaty 

 Coast has consequently been since 1893 the same as it is to-day. 

 His Majesty's Government do not advance these considerations with 

 the object of suggesting that the objections which the United States' 

 Government have taken to sections 1 and 3 of the Foreign Fishing- 

 Vessels Act are impaired by the fact that these provisions have been 

 on the Statute Book of the Colony since 1893 without protest, and 

 they are ready to assume that no such protest has been lodged merely 

 because the privileges accorded to American vessels in tiie ports of the 

 Colony up to the present have been such as to render it unnecessary 

 for inhabitants of the United States to avail themselves of their right 

 of fishing under the Convention of 1818. The object of His Majesty's 

 Government is simply to remove any impression which may have 

 formed itself in the mind of the United States' Government that the 

 language of the Act of 1905 was selected with any special view of 

 prejudicing the exercise of the American Treaty right of fishery, and 

 to point out that, on the contrary, it dates back to 1893, that is, to a 

 time when it was the policy of the Colonial Government to treat 

 American vessels on a favoured footing. 



A new Act was not necessary to give effect to the present policy of 

 the Colonial Government. Effect to it could have been given under 



