226 THE ABGUMENT OF THE UNITED STATES. 



States of all real benefit under the treaty and would leave American 

 fishermen a trivial and barren right. 



The British contention was originated by Sir Robert Bond, premier 

 of Newfoundland, in a debate in the House of Assembly of that 

 colony, April 7, 1905, eighty-seven years subsequent to the ratifica- 

 tion of the treaty of 1818. He said on that occasion : 



I believe I am correct in saying that it is the first time that this 

 position has been taken, and, if I am correct in my interpretation of 

 the treaty of 1818, the whole winter herring fishery of the west coast 

 has been carried on for years by the Americans simply at the suffer- 

 ance of the government of this Colony. 



His construction of the treaty failed to produce conviction in the 

 minds of the members of his own Government, or of the Government 

 of Great Britain. No mention of it was ever made in the voluminous 

 correspondence between Great Britain and the United States until 

 Question Six was proposed by Great Britain, that Government having 

 agreed with Sir Robert Bond to include it in this arbitration, as a 

 means of securing the assent of Newfoundland to the modus vivendi 

 of 1907. 



The Case of the United States states that: 



Great Britain has never, by word or act, throughout the entire 

 history of this controversy questioned the right of the inhabitants of 

 the United States under the treaty of 1818 to take fish in the bays and 

 harbors of the southern and western coasts of Newfoundland which 

 form part of the so-called " treaty coasts ; " 



that- 

 such question has never been raised or even mentioned in any of 

 the discussions between the two governments with respect to the inter- 

 pretation of this treaty ; 



and that 



the United States has always asserted the right of the American 

 fishermen to take fish in the waters referred to, and American fisher- 

 men have, ever since the treaty was made, openly exercised their 

 right to take fish in these waters without objection or interference by 

 the Newfoundland government up to the present time. 6 



The British Counter Case, in the fraction of a page which it de- 

 votes to this Question, makes no denial of either of the first two of the 

 above assertions, and contents itself with saying that the third asser- 

 tion " cannot be admitted." It will be observed that Great Britain 

 fails to produce the slightest evidence to sustain this qualified denial. 



U. S. Case, 245. U. S. Case, 244-245. British Counter Case, 59. 



