16 THE ARGUMENT OF THE UNITED STATES. 



ing that such interpretation will show that there are no words or 

 phrases in the treaty which expressly or by necessary implication re- 

 serve to Great Britain power to limit or restrain in any manner the 

 enjoyment by American fishermen of the right to take fish, the United 

 States submits that the question at issue between the two Govern- 

 ments is as to what regulation of the freedom of the fishery in the 

 matter of the time and manner of taking fish remains part of British 

 sovereignty over waters within which exclusive sovereignty over the 

 fishery has been parted with by Great Britain by virtue of its grant 

 to the United States of an equal right in the said fishery. 



The phrase, " the matter of the time and manner of taking fish " 

 is here used as comprehending and embracing the several matters 

 of regulation specified in Question One. Regulations in respect to 

 the hours, days, or seasons when fish may be taken go to the time, and 

 regulations in respect to the method, means and implements to be 

 used in fishing go to the manner. The third specification of regula- 

 tions, viz, " any other matters of a similar character relating to 

 fishing " does not, it is conceived, enlarge the character of the regula- 

 tions submitted for the judgment of this Tribunal, because, on the 

 principle noscitur a sociis, the other matters must have relation to 

 and be ejusdem generis with those first enumerated. 



INTERNATIONAL SERVITUDES. 



The United States submits that the treaty of 1818 created an inter- 

 national servitude in its favor to be exercised within British terri- 

 tory a real right as distinguished from an obligation. What the 

 servitude is, its measure and extent, and whether Great Britain 

 reserved any right to impair its enjoyment by limiting regulations 

 depend, of course, on the terms of the treaty. The United States 

 will undertake to show that the treaty contained no such reserved 

 right, and will insist that, in the absence of such reserved right, 

 Great Britain has no power, without the consent of the United States, 

 under the principles of international law, to limit, restrain, or burden 

 in any manner the exercise and enjoyment of the servitude. 



Tt is proposed to discuss, first, the doctrine of international servi- 

 tudes, because, it is thought that, to establish clearly the nature in 



