154 THE ARGUMENT OF THE UNITED STATES. 



to keep three miles off from a line drawn from headland to headland 

 on the extreme outside limits of that bay, a line which might measure 

 fifty miles or more, according to the manner of drawing or imagining 

 it, would be a most unreasonable and therefore unnatural supposition. 

 I cannot think that it entered the minds of the British plenipoten- 

 tiaries any more than ours. * * * 



I remained minister at the court seven years after the signing of 

 the convention. Opportunities of complaint were, therefore, never 

 wanting. If intimated to me, it would have been my duty to trans- 

 mit at once every such communication to our Government. Nor did 

 I ever hear complaints through the British legation at Washington. 

 It would have been natural to make objections when our miscon- 

 struction of the instrument was fresh if we did misconstrue it. The 

 occasion would have been especially opportune when I was subse- 

 quently engaged in extensive negotiations with England in 1823-24 

 which brought under consideration the whole relations, commercial 

 and territorial between the two countries, including our entire inter- 

 course by sea and land with her North American colonies. Still 

 silence was never broken in the metropolitan atmosphere of London 

 whilst I remained there.* 1 



THE RENUNCIATORY CLAUSE INTERPRETED BY THE ACTIONS 

 OF THE TWO GOVERNMENTS FOLLOWING THE TREATY. 



The Case of the United States B states : 



During the eighteen years from 1818 to 1836, and, in fact, for 

 several years thereafter, no question arose between Great Britain 

 and the United States under this treaty involving the interpretation 

 of the meaning of ite provisions. * * * The only seizures of 

 American vessels during this period were made between the years 

 1821 and 1824 for alleged violations of the provisions of this section 

 of the act. It will be found upon an examination of the circum- 

 stances surrounding these seizures that in every instance they were 

 made under the direction of British naval officers on the charge of 

 fishing within three miles of the shore in waters wherein the liberty 

 of fishing had been renounced by the treaty, or of being within three 

 miles of the shore in such waters for purposes other than the four 

 purposes of shelter, repairs, wood, and water provided for in the 

 treaty. 



It is unnecessary to discuss the evidence regarding these seizures 

 which is fully reviewed in the Case of the United States. The evi- 

 dence establishes beyond any possibility of successful dispute that 



U. S. Case, Appendix, 554. 

 6 U. S. Case, 75-76. 

 C TL S. Case, 75-81, 



