NORTH ATLANTIC FISHERIES DISPUTE r, 



does not purpose to trade as well as fish, and something more 



would seem clearly to be necessary. ' ' Without supervision of this nature 

 it would be impossible to prevent illicit trade. 



(d) That Section 7 of "The Foreign Fishing Vessels Act, 1905" 

 preserved "the rights and privileges granted by Treaty to the subjects 

 of any State in amity with His Majesty." 



In 1906, a modus vivendi was arranged. The British Government 

 suspended the Newfoundland "Foreign Fishing Vessels Act, 1906," 

 which imposed on United States vessels certain restrictions in addition to 

 those imposed by the Act of 1905 ; the provisions of the first part of Sec- 

 tion 1 of the Act of 1905 as to boarding and bringing into port and the 

 whole of Sec. 3 of the same Act were not regarded as applying to United 

 States fishing vessels and the use of purse seines was permitted for that 

 season. The United States Government agreed that its fishermen would 

 comply with the Colonial Fishery Regulations respecting the payment 

 of light dues and fishing on Sunday ; that the shipment of Newfound- 

 landers would be made far enough from the three-mile limit to avoid 

 any reasonable doubt and that they would enter and clear at Newfound- 

 land custom houses when physically possible to do so. 



This modus vivendi continued in force till arbitration before the 

 Hague Tribunal was arranged for, and since. 



Agreement to On Jan. 27, 1909, Mr. James Bryce and Mr. Elihu Root 

 Arbitrate signed a "Special Agreement for the submission of ques- 



tions relating to Fisheries on the North Atlantic Coast under the Gen- 

 eral Convention of Arbitration concluded between Great Britain and 

 the United States on April 4, 1908." 



It recited that "whereas, differences have arisen as to the scope and 

 meaning of the said article, [Art. I, Convention of London, 1818,] and 

 of the liberties therein referred to, and otherwise in respect the rights 

 and liberties which the inhabitants of the United States have or claim 

 to have in the waters or on the shores therein referred to : 



It is agreed that the following questions shall be submitted for de- 

 cision to a tribunal of arbitration constituted as hereinafter provided: 



Question 1. To what extent are the following contentions or either 

 of them justified? 



It is contended on the part of Great Britain that the exercise of the 

 liberty to take fish referred to in the said article, which the inhabitants of 

 the United States have for ever in common with the subjects of His Brit- 

 annic Majesty, is subject, without the consent of the United States, to 

 reasonable regulation by Great Britain, Canada, or Newfoundland in the 

 form of municipal laws, ordinances, or rules, as, for example, to regula- 



