222 THE ARGUMENT OF THE UNITED STATES. 



British territory, and part of the country made subject to the Legis- 

 lature of Newfoundland. 



To establish this proposition it is not necessary to go further back 

 than to the 59 Geo. 3, c. 38, passed in 1819, now nearly sixty years 

 ago. * * * 



And as this assertion of dominion has not been questioned by any 

 nation from 1819 down to 1872, when a fresh convention was made, 

 this would be very strong in the tribunals of any nation to shew that 

 this bay is by prescription part of the exclusive territory of Great 

 Britain. As already observed, in a British tribunal it is decisive. 



Inasmuch as the Act of 59 Geo. Ill was passed immediately 

 after the treaty of 1818, and merely used the words of the treaty, 

 and since the evidence before this Tribunal establishes that the 

 United States has steadfastly, since the question arose, not acquiesced 

 in the exclusive dominion of Newfoundland or Great Britain over 

 any bays on the non-treaty coasts, but has, on the contrary, asserted 

 the right of American fishermen freely to resort to all such bays not 

 less than six miles in width at their entrances so long as they did 

 not fish within three marine miles of the shores thereof, it is appar- 

 ent that the assumption by the Privy Council that the United States 

 had " from 1819 down to 1872 " not questioned the assertion of ex- 

 clusive dominion over this bay is without foundation in fact. An 

 examination of the record in this Conception Bay case also shows 

 that it contains no evidence that the United States ever regarded this 

 act as an assertion by Newfoundland or Great Britain of exclusive 

 dominion over the waters of this bay. 



The case of Regina vs. Keyn, (L. K. 2 Ex. Div., p. 63), was de- 

 cided on the ground that the Central Criminal Court of England had 

 no power to try, in the absence of statutory authorization, an offence 

 committed by a foreigner on board a foreign ship within the limit 

 of three miles from the English coast. 



The case of Regina vs. Cunningham (Bell's Crown Cases, page 72) 

 is not authority for the statement that " by the common law of Eng- 

 land, all enclosed waters are within the realm." " That case merely 

 decided that an offence committed aboard a ship at anchor was com- 

 mitted within the jurisdiction of Glamorgan County in Wales " when 

 [page 72] the ship was three-quarters of a mile from land," of the 

 County of Glamorgan, and within " a quarter of a mile of the land 

 which is left dry by the tide," and " when the offence was com- 

 mitted, the ship was inside and about two miles from the Flat 

 Holms," an island, lying off the shore, and it having been determined 



British Case, 112. 



