1273 
‘6. The text reference is to U.N. Doc. No. A/Conf.13/C.4/L.4: “For the purpose of 
these articles, the common expression ‘continental shelf’ is used as ref- 
ring to the seabed, soil and subsoil of the submarine areas adjacent to the 
coast but outside the area of the territorial sea, including both constituent 
parts of the continental terrace, namely the continental shelf proper and 
the continental slope with its gorges, valleys, depressions and ravines, 
as far as the further points at which the depth of the superadjacent 
waters admits of the exploitation of the natural resources and the said areas 
of the continental solpe, but excluding the great depths of oceanic basins.” 
6 Official Records, United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea 127 
(U.N. Doe. No. A/Conf.13/42) (1958). 
7. North Sea Continental Shelf, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1969, para. 63, p. 39. 
8. Id. at para. 73, p. 42. 
9. Id. at para. 41, p. 30. 
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, 
DEPARTMENT OF NAVAL ARCHITECTURE AND MARINE HNGINEERING, 
Cambridge, Mass., August 9, 1969. 
Prof. THomMAS A. CLINGAN, Jr., 
Counsel, Subcommittee on Oceanography, Committee on Merchant Marine and 
Fisheries, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. 
DEAR PROFESSOR CLINGAN: Word has just reached me of your appointment 
as Counsel to the Subcommittee on Oceanography in connection with the hear- 
ings on the Stratton Report. May I extend congratulations and all good wishes. 
The Subcommittee has important work cut out for it in bringing the results of 
the Presidential Commission’s recommendations into line with national policy. 
For what it may be worth, I take liberty in enclosing a review article on the 
Commission’s report just published in Zhe Technology Review under the title 
“Alternatives for Ocean Policy.” 
I should have appreciated an opportunity to present my views on the Com- 
mission’s recommendations to the Committee. This was out of the question with 
an early autumn deadline on a book. If you deem the observations worth com- 
municating to others, and if it would be in conformity with Committee policy, I 
should have no objection to the article being reprinted with the hearings. I feel 
sure the Hditor of the Review would share this position. 
I am particularly interested in getting across the views expressed with re- 
spect to the proposed international licensing authority. This impresses me as 
being unnecessary at this time and even possibly harmful to long-run American 
national interests. It would limit our freedom of action in an area that is vital to 
our security and tie our hands in the development of ocean resources. 
I expect to be in Washington in the middle of September and would be pleased 
to discuss matters with you if you would care to do so. 
Sincerely, 
NorMAN J. PADELFORD, 
Professor of Political Science. 
[From the 'Technology Review, July/August 1969] 
ALTERNATIVES FOR OCEAN POLICY 
(By Norman J. Padelford, Professor of Political Science, Emeritus, M.I.T.) 
Norman J. Padelford is Professor of Political Science Emeritus 
and Senior Lecturer in the M.I.T. Departments of Political Science 
and of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering. Educated at 
Denison and Harvard Universities, he has worked with the Depart- 
ment of State and with the United Nations on problems of inter- 
national organization. Professor Padelford has specialized in 
studies of international political organization and, more recently, 
in work on ocean resources. He is the author of numerous books 
including Public Policy and the Uses of the Sea (M.I.T. Press, 1969). 
He is a founding member of the Board of Editors of a new journal 
entitled Journal of Maritime Law and Commerce. 
Multiple pressures are forcing nations to “go down to the seas” anew. The mo- 
tives are more pragmatic than the poet had in mind, however—more raw ma- 
