QUESTION ONE. 83 



to fish which she had ineffectually asserted for over a century, retain- 

 ing the right to fish on the prescribed coasts on a footing of equality 

 with British subjects. French rights of fishing under this new 

 treaty are not as great as the American rights under the treaty of 

 1818, either in the extent of coasts or in the essential nature of the 

 rights. Yet the two Governments agreed by that treaty that the 

 policing of the fishing and the prevention of illicit liquor traffic 

 and smuggling of spirits, should form the subject of regulations 

 drawn up in agreement by the two Governments. 



All these treaties show the entire practicability of regulations to 

 be made by the joint action of the two Governments, as well as 

 of their joint administration and enforcement within British terri- 

 tory. While the regulations mentioned in the treaty of 1904 for 

 the policing of the fishing, appear to have been such only as might 

 be necessary to secure the fair participation of the French in the 

 fisheries and to preserve order among the fishermen, the admission 

 of France to participation in the making and administration of such 

 regulations was certainly as much in derogation of British sover- 

 eignty as any contention advanced by the United States in this case. 



The treaty of 1904 is noticeable also in the fact that it expressly 

 reserves to Great Britain the power to establish closed seasons and 

 to 'make regulations for the improvement of the fisheries, a reserva- 

 tion not made in the treaty of 1818. 



BRITISH ADMISSION OF DOMINANT FRENCH RIGHTS. 



It is impossible to examine the conduct by Great Britain of the 

 fishing controversy with France without being convinced that the 

 former fully recognized that the French treaty right in Newfound- 

 land waters was a real right as distinguished from a mere obliga- 

 tion, and that it constituted an international servitude which lim- 

 ited the territorial sovereignty of Great Britain. The large measure 

 of authority to be exercised by France in British waters conferred 

 by the treaties above mentioned prove this fact. The declarations of 

 British statesmen from time to time prove it. It is shown by the 

 declaration of the Earl of Derby to the governor of Newfoundland, 

 contained in his letter of June 12, 1884, that, 



" the peculiar fisheries rights granted by treaties to the French in 

 Newfoundland invest those waters during the months of the year 



a U. S. Case, Appendix, 83. 



