4 ABQUMENT OF GBBAT BRITAIN. 



THE CONTENTIONS. 



The treaty of 1818 gave to the inhabitants of the United States 

 certain liberties in British waters and upon British land to be exer- 

 cised in common with British fishermen. 



It is agreed that authoritative regulations governing the action of 

 all these fishermen are necessary, not only for the purpose of ensuring 

 reasonable respect for mutual rights, but for the preservation of the 

 fisheries from depletion and destruction. 



His Majesty's Government contends that effective authority to 

 make reasonable and necessary regulations to be observed by both 

 British and United States fishermen in the waters and upon the land 

 affected by the treaty of 1818 exists; and that such authority is 

 vested in the Power in whom the sovereignty over the waters and 

 shores is vested, that is, in Great Britain. In the view of His 

 Majesty's Government the treaty imposes no limitation whatever on 

 British sovereignty, although an undertaking by Great Britain is 

 implied not to exercise that sovereignty in such a way as to nullify 

 the liberty of fishing conferred by it, or to discriminate unfairly 

 against American fishermen. Great Britain holds that British leg- 

 islation is binding on all persons within this British jurisdic- 



5 tion, and that if objection is to be taken to it on the ground 

 that it unfairly affects privileges granted by the treaty, that 



must be done by diplomatic representation. The legislation remains 

 valid until repealed or modified by Great Britain. 



The United States Government, on the other hand, contends that 

 the treaty has imposed a direct limitation on the sovereignty of 

 Great Britain so far as American fishermen are concerned, and that 

 no regulations binding on them can be made without the assent of 

 the United States. 



It is obvious that in practice Great Britain cannot subject her own 

 fishermen to restrictions from which American fishermen are ex- 

 empt. The difference, therefore, between the views of the two Gov- 

 ernments is of importance, for, if the contention of the United States 

 were to prevail, it would not be possible for Great Britain to make 

 any fishery regulations at all without the previous assent of the 

 United States. 



There is nothing in the express terms of the treaty which supports 

 the contention that any limitation is imposed by it on the sover- 

 eignty of His Majesty, and it is submitted that no limitation of this 

 character ought to be read into it merely by implication. Nor was 

 there anything in the situation of the parties at the time of the treaty 

 from which such a limitation could be implied. 



In the Counter-Case of the United States it is claimed that the 

 question before the Tribunal relates only to the right of fishing. 



