730 THE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE SEA 



equal effect on foreigners, that some international arrangement, 

 such as had been previously recommended by the Select Com- 

 mittees of the House of Commons and the House of Lords, 1 

 should be reached. It appears that there would have been no 

 difficulty in arranging such an agreement with Norway, which 

 was desirous of entering into negotiations for the purpose ; but 

 it was felt by the Foreign Office that, while an arrangement 

 of the kind would not bind other Powers, questions of reci- 

 procity might be raised, and British trawlers might be excluded 

 from similar areas on foreign coasts. They therefore declined 

 to enter upon negotiations with foreign Powers until the whole 

 policy had been carefully considered. 2 One point of view 

 which was taken was indicated in a speech of the Under- 

 secretary for Foreign Affairs (Lord Fitzmaurice) in the course 

 of a debate in February 1907, which had been initiated by 

 Lord Balfour of Burleigh. He stated that according to the 

 views hitherto accepted by the chief departments of the 

 Government the Foreign Office, the Admiralty, the Colonial 

 Office, the Board of Trade, and the Board of Agriculture and 

 Fisheries and apart from the provisions of special treaties, 

 territorial waters were : " First, the waters which extend from 

 the coast-line of any part of the territory of a State to three 

 miles from the low- water mark of such coast-line ; secondly, the 

 waters of bays the entrance to which is not more than six 

 miles in width, and of which the entire land boundary forms 

 part of the territory of a State. By custom, however, and 

 by treaty and in special convention, the six -mile limit has 

 frequently been extended to more than six miles." 3 The 

 Lord Chancellor, it may be said, was absent through illness ; 

 and the declaration quoted, though it represents what has been 

 the general, but by no means the invariable, attitude of the 

 British Foreign Office in dealing with territorial waters, is not 

 in accordance with the law of nations, as is shown in the 

 foregoing chapters. Nor does it agree with the opinions 

 expressed in a former debate by the late Lord Salisbury, so 

 long the distinguished Foreign Minister of this country, by 



1 See p. 707 ct seq. 



2 Hansard, vol. 169, pp. 832, 991, 1037 ; vol. 170, pp. 786, 1246, 1247; vol. 192, 

 p. 832, &c. 



:) Ibid. 



