28 COMMISSION OF CONSERVATION 



(a) Because the conditions and restrictions as to the liberty to dry 

 and cure ou the shore and to enter the harbours are limitations of the 

 rights themselves, and not restrictions of their exercise. Thus, the rigiil 

 to dry and cure is limited in duration, and the right to enter bays and 

 harbours is limited to particular purposes. 



(b) Because these restrictions of the right to enter bays and harbours 

 applying solely to American fishermen must have been expressed in the 

 Treaty, whereas regulations of the fishery, applying equally to American 

 and British, are made by right of territorial sovereignty. 



P''or the purpose of such proof it has beeen contended by the United 

 States : 



(8) That LoKD Bathurst in 1815 mentioned the American right 

 under the Treaty of 1783 as a right to be exercised "at the 

 discretion of the United States"; and that this should be held 

 as to be derogatory to the claim of exclusive regulation by 

 Great Britain. 



But the Tribunal is unable to agree with this contention : 

 (a) Because these words implied only the necessity of an express 

 stipulation for any liberty to use foreign territory at the pleasure of the 

 grantee, without touching any question as to regulation ; 



(6) Because in this same letter Lord Bathurst characterized this 

 right as a policy "temporary and experimental, depending on the use 

 that might be made of it, on the condition of the islands and places where 

 it was to be exercised, and the more general conveniences or inconveni- 

 ences from a militarj', naval and commercial point of view"; so that it 

 cannot have been his intention to acknowledge the exclusion of British 

 interference with this right; 



(c) Because Lord Bathurst in his note to Governor Sir C. Hamil- 

 ton in 1819 orders the Governor to take care that the American fishery 

 on the coast of Labrador be carried on in the same manner as previous 

 to the late war ; showing that he did not interpret the Treaty just signed 

 as a grant conveying absolute immunity from interference with the Am- 

 erican fishery riglit. 



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

 States : 



(9) That on various other occasions following the conclusion of the 

 Treaty, as evidenced by official correspondence. Great Britain 

 made use of expressions inconsistent with the claim to a right 

 of regulation. 



The Tribunal, unwilling to invest such expressions with an import- 

 ance entitling them to affect the general question, considers that such 



