APPENDIX 399 



ciently explained by their relations to ephemeral phases 

 of a controversy of almost secular duration, and should 

 be held to be without direct effect on the principal and 

 present issues. 



Now with regard to the second contention involved in 

 Question I, as to whether the right of regulation can be 

 reasonably exercised by Great Britain without the consent 

 of the United States : 



Considering that the recognition of a concurrent right 

 of consent in the United States would affect the independ- 

 ence of Great Britain, which would become dependent on 

 the Government of the United States for the exercise of 

 its sovereign right of regulation, and considering that 

 such a co-dominium would be contrary to the constitution 

 of both sovereign States; the burden of proof is imposed 

 on the United States to show that the independence of 

 Great Britain was thus impaired by international contract 

 in 1818 and that a co-dominium was created. 



For the purpose of such proof it is contended by the 

 United States: 



(10) That a concurrent right to cooperate in the mak- 

 ing and enforcement of regulations is the only 

 possible and proper security to their inhabitants 

 for the enjoyment of their liberties as fishery, 

 and that such a right must be held to be implied 

 in the grant of those liberties by the Treaty 

 under interpretation. 



The Tribunal is unable to accede to this claim on the 

 ground of a right so implied : 



(a) Because every State has to execute the obligations 

 incurred by Treaty bona fide, and is urged thereto by the 



