1048 MISCELLANEOUS. 



2d. Except within certain defined limits to which the query put 

 to us does not apply, we are of opinion that by the terms of the 

 Treaty, American citizens are excluded from the right of fishing 

 within three miles of the Coast of British America, and that the 

 prescribed distance of three miles is to be measured from the head- 

 lands or extreme points of land next the sea of the coast, or of the 

 entrance of the Bays, and not from the interior of such Bays or In- 

 dents of the coast, and consequently that no right exists on the part 

 of American citizens to enter the Bays of Nova Scotia there to take 

 fish, although the fishing being within the Bay may be at a greater 

 distance than three miles from the shore of the Bay, as we are of 

 opinion the term headland is used in the Treaty to express the part 

 of land we have before mentioned, excluding the interior of the Bays 

 and the indents of the coast. 



4th. By the treaty of 1818 it is agreed that American citizens 

 should have the liberty of fishing in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, within 

 certain defined limits, in common with British subjects; and such 

 treaty does not contain any words negativing the right to navigate 

 the passage or Gut of Canso, and therefore it may be conceded that 

 such right of navigation is not taken away by that Convention ; but 

 we have now attentively considered the course of navigation to the 

 Gulf, by Cape Breton, and likewise the capacity and situation of the 

 passage of Canso, and of the British Dominions on either side, and 

 we are of opinion that, independently of Treaty, no Foreign country 

 has the right to use or navigate the passage of Canso ; and attending 

 to the terms of the convention relating to the liberty of Fishery 

 to be enjoyed by the Americans, we are also of opinion that that 

 convention did not either expressly or by implication, concede any 

 such right of using or navigating the passage in question. We are 

 also of opinion that casting bait to lure Fish in the track of my 

 American vessels navigating the passage, would constitute a fishing 

 within the negative terms of the convention. 



5th. With reference to the claim of a right to land on the Magdilen 

 Islands, and to fish from the shores thereof, it must be observed, that 

 by the Treaty, the liberty of drying and curing Fish (purposes wlich 

 could only be accomplished by landing) in any of the unsettled Biys, 

 etc. of southern part of Newfoundland, and of the coast of Labrador 

 is specifically provided for; but such liberty is distinctly negati/ed 

 in any settled Bay, etc., and it must therefore be inferred, that if the 

 liberty of landing on the shores of the Magdalen Islands had been 

 intended to be conceded, such an important concession would have 

 been the subject of express stipulation, and would necessarily have 

 been accompanied with a description of the inland extent of the shore 

 over which such liberty was to be exercised, and whether in settjed 

 or unsettled parts, but neither of these important particulars are 

 provided for, even by implication, and that, among other considera- 

 tions leads us to the conclusion that American citizens have no rigfrt 

 to land or conduct the Fishery from the shores of the Magdalen 

 Islands. The word " shore " does not appear to be used in the Con- 

 vention in any other than the general or ordinary sense of the word, 

 and must be construed with reference to the liberty to be exercised 

 upon it, and would therefore comprise the land covered with water, 

 as far as could be available for the due enjoyment of the liberty 

 granted. 



