NORTH ATLANTIC FISHERIES DISPUTE 25 



(1786), forbids "the use, on the shores of Newfoundland, of seines or 

 nets for catching cod by hauling on shore or taking into boat, with mesh- 

 es less than 4 inches;" a prohibition which cannot be considered as 

 limited to the bank fishery. The act for regulating the fisheries of New 

 Brunswick, 1793, which forbids "the placing of nets or seines across any 

 cove or creek in the Province so as to obstruct the natural course of fish," 

 and which makes specific provision for fishing in the Harbour of St. 

 John, as to the manner and time of fishing, cannot be read as being 

 limited to fishing from the shore. The act for regulating the fishing on 

 the coast of Northumberland (1797) contains very elaborate dispositions 

 concerning the fisheries iu tlie Bay of Miramichi which were continued 

 in 1823, 1829 and 1834. The Statutes of Lower Canada, 1788 and 1807, 

 forbid the throwing overboard of offal. The fact that these acts extend 

 the prohibition over a greater distance than the first marine league from 

 the shore may make them non-operative against foreigners without the 

 territorial limits of Great Britain, but is certainly no reason to deny 

 their obligatory character for foreigners within the limits; 



(/i) Because the fact that Great Britain rarely exercised the right of 

 regulation in the period immediately succeeding 1818 is to be explained 

 by various circumstances and is not evidence of the non-existence of the 

 right; 



(t) Because the words "in common with British subjects" tend to 

 confirm the opinion that the inhabitants of the United States were ad- 

 mitted to a regulated fishery ; 



(i) Because the Statute of Great Britain, 1819, which gives legis- 

 lative sanction to the Treaty of 1818, provides for the making of "regula- 

 tions with relation to the taking, drying and curing of fish by inhabitants 

 of the United States in ' common. ' ' ' 



For the purpose of such proof, it is further contended by the United 

 States, in this latter connection : 



(4) That the words "in common with British subjects" used in the 

 Treaty should not be held as importing a common subjection 

 to regulation, but as intending to negative a possible pretension 

 on the part of the inhabitants of the United States to liberties 

 of fishery exclusive of the right of British subjects to fish. 

 The Tribunal is unable to agree with this contention : 

 (a) Because such an interpretation is inconsistent with the histori- 

 cal basis of the American fishing liberty. The ground on which Mr. 

 Adams founded the American right in 1782 was that the people then 

 constituting the United States had always, when still under British rule, 

 a part in these fisheries and that they must continue to enjoy their past 

 right in the future. He proposed "that the subjects of His Britannic 

 Majesty and the people of the United States shall continue to enjoy 



