QUESTION FIVE. 147 



the three-mile line was to be drawn seaward from such waters as 

 though the shore-line continued across their entrances. So the clause 

 was stated : " On or within three marine miles of any of the coasts, 

 bays, creeks, or harbours of His Britannic Majesty's Dominions in 

 America." 



There was, it was seen, no practical difference between the rule 

 of three marine miles from the coasts that is, land and three 

 marine miles from the coasts, bays, creeks, or harbors determined by 

 the three marine miles measured from land. The area of water 

 involved was too small to be regarded, and when the words in the 

 proposal were gathered from the treaty of 1783 a simple form of 

 expression was used. The important fact was that thereafter the 

 fishing vessels of the United States should not approach, for the 

 purpose of fishing, nearer than three miles to land, and the bays 

 lying landward of the three-mile line following the sinuosities of the 

 shore, were regarded as territorial, and the lines closing them as a 

 continuation of the shore-line. 



So the treaty was understood at the time of its making, as will 

 presently be disclosed, and so it was construed without discussion for 

 nearly a quarter of a century. 



The occupation and use of these bays, creeks, or harbors, lying within 

 the " British limits " that is, landward of the three-mile line and 

 therefore within "His Britannic Majesty's Dominions in America" 

 where settlements had been made, had been one of the subjects of 

 complaint. The proviso clause, following the renunciatory clause, 

 prescribed the terms upon which, so far as this treaty was concerned, 

 the fishing vessels of the United States were thereafter to enter them. 



Provided, however, That the American fishermen shall be admitted 

 to enter such bays or harbors for the purpose of shelter and of re- 

 pairing damages therein, or purchasing wood, and of obtaining water, 

 and for no other purpose whatever. But they shall be under such 

 restrictions as may be necessary to prevent their taking, drying, or 

 curing fish therein or in any other manner whatever abusing the 

 privileges hereby reserved to them. 



These small bays, creeks, or harbors furnished natural shelter, and 

 opportunity to procure wood and water and to make repairs. 



The futility of the effort in the British Counter Case to show that 

 the United States has changed its position on this subject is too 

 apparent to necessitate an extended reply. The important matter 

 under discussion is the right, under the terms of this treaty, of Amer- 

 ican fishing vessels to enter the great bays and to fish therein, so long 



