90 THE ARGUMENT OF THE UNITED STATES. 



States, but that no such person is entitled to take fish unless he is 

 an inhabitant of the United States. Taking up this conten- 

 tion of Great Britain the United States presents the following 

 considerations : 



1. It has been shown in the discussion of Question One that the 

 fishery right granted by the treaty of 1818 was a national right held 

 by the United States for the benefit of its inhabitants. The United 

 States regards its right in this fishery as the foundation of a 

 national industry, which not only furnishes a source of food supply 

 for its own people, but gives to it a medium of exchange with the 

 world at large which will add to its national wealth. That the fish- 

 ery to its fullest extent was to be enjoyed by the United States for 

 both domestic and export purposes was avowed by the representatives 

 of the United States prior to the making of the treaty of 1783 and 

 prior to the making of the treaty of 1818. 



By the municipal law common to the two countries, if a fishery 

 right is one of profit and not of pleasure, it carries with it the right 

 of exercise by a master and his servants. If of pleasure alone, it can 

 be exercised only by the master. 6 



It is submitted that the rule of the common law of England and 

 the United States is based on sound reason and justice; and, there- 

 fore, that a similar rule must, under the broad and equitable prin- 

 ciples of international law, be applied by this Tribunal to the deter- 

 mination of the Question here submitted. 



2. It is conceded that the granting nation may accompany such 

 a grant as that under consideration with such conditions in respect 

 of its exercise as it may deem proper and if the use of the words 

 " inhabitants of the United States " in the granting part of the 

 treaty was intended to limit the exercise of the right, in the sense 

 that only inhabitants of the United States should engage in the 

 manual act of fishing in British waters, that would be the rule to be 

 followed. That the words were used with that intention appears 

 to be the British view according to the letter of Sir Edward Grey 

 quoted in the Counter Case of the United States." Such a position, 



U. S. Case, Appendix, 220, 221, 223, 225, 267, 272, 273. 



* Duchess of Norfolk's Case, Yearbook, 12 Hen., 7, 25; 13 Hen., 7, 12, pi. 2; 

 Wickham & Hawker, 1 Mees. & W., 63-77, by Baron Parke. 

 U. S. Counter Case, 48. 



