254 THE AEGUMENT OF THE UNITED STATES. 



First. The result, if the contention of Sir Robert Bond was sus- 

 tained, would be that the treaty of 1818 did not deal at all with the 

 bays, harbors, and creeks of the western coast of Newfoundland, and 

 of the Magdalen Islands. 



By this contention they were not secured to the United States, and 

 its fishermen have no rights in them. 



Neither was the liberty to take fish in these bays renounced by the 

 United States. 



The renunciatory clause is as follows : 



And the United States hereby renounce forever any liberty hereto- 

 fore enjoyed or claimed by the inhabitants thereof to take, dry or 

 cure fish on or within three marine miles of any of the coasts, bays, 

 creeks or harbors of His Britannic Majesty's dominions in America 

 not included within the above mentioned limits. 



The bays, creeks, and harbors, of the west coast of Newfoundland, 

 and of the Magdalens, are "included within the above mentioned 

 limits" i. e., from Cape Eay to the Rameau Islands and from Cape 

 Ray to the Quirpon Islands, and on the shores of the Magdalen 

 Islands, and are, therefore, not covered by the renunciatory clause. 



The Tribunal is asked to violate all canons of construction and to 

 hold that in a treaty, entered into to settle " differences which have 

 arisen respecting * * * certain coasts, bays, harbours, and creeks," 

 these important bays, harbors, and creeks of the west coast of New- 

 foundland, were overlooked altogether. American lawyers have been 

 taught differently by English decisions. 



In re Harrison (1885, 30 Ch. Div., 390, pp. 393, 394), Lord Esher 

 says: 



There is one rule of construction which to my mind is a golden rule, 

 viz., that when a testator has executed a will in solemn form, you 

 must assume that he did not intend to make it a solemn farce that 

 he did not intend to die intestate when he has gone through the form 

 of making a will. You ought, if possible, to read the will so as to 

 read to a testacy, not to an intestacy. This is a golden rule. 



If Sir Robert Bond's contention is adopted then the treaty of 1818, 

 in one of its most important particulars, was a solemn farce; the 

 distinguished plenipotentiaries who had assembled as representatives 

 of two great powers to compose differences existing between them 

 had followed the example of the King of Spain and his forty 



