94 THE ABGUMENT OF THE UNITED STATES. 



would be commensurate with the requirements of the nation, for its 

 internal and external trade; and that the United States could not 

 and would not, if required, find sufficient agencies of its own to fully 

 exhaust the right granted it, both for internal supply and export 

 demand, is an idea, it is submitted, that never found lodgment in the 

 minds of the negotiators on either side. 



7. The United States denies that the position which it has assumed 

 on this Question can lead to the result suggested in the British Case, 

 namely 



If the nationality of the ship, or of the owner of it, and not the na- 

 tionality of the fishermen actually engaged in the fishing, be the test 

 of the right to fish under the treaty, then fishermen of other countries 

 can obtain access to these fisheries, subject to such restrictions as the 

 law of the United States may from time to time impose. They may, 

 by charter or arrangement, obtain control of an American vessel, 

 or they may engage to serve on an American vessel. Once on board, 

 their nationality, according to the contention of the United States 

 becomes of no importance; the moment they have entered British 

 waters under the American flag they become entitled to the full rights 

 conferred by the treaty. This is no fanciful objection. The British 

 North American fisheries are of great value, and would be engerly 

 competed for by foreign fishermen if it became known that access 

 could in any way be obtained to them. 



On the facts here assumed the fishing would not be by inhabitants 

 of the United States in any sense. The United States does not main- 

 tain that being on board an American fishing vessel gives the right 

 to fish under the treaty, but that being on board such a vessel under 

 engagement to fish for an inhabitant or inhabitants of the United 

 States does give such right. No foreigner, not an inhabitant, can 

 charter an American vessel and thereby entitle himself to fish under 

 the treaty. He would be fishing for himself as much as if fishing 

 on a vessel of his own nationality. On the other hand, if he be on 

 an American vessel engaged in a bona -fide fishing venture for and 

 in the interest of American inhabitants, his act is the act of his 

 principals, and, even though he be a non-inhabitant, his act does 

 not constitute the taking of fish by a non-inhabitant. The posi- 

 tion of Great Britain apparently is that the fisherman is to be con- 

 sidered separate and apart from the vessel, for which he fishes, and 



British Case, 58. 



