ii\ 



\\ 



Island, and the adjacent irtlandtt, without Ikmi)<^' rcHtrictud to any distance from the 

 Hhoro. 



2nd. Tliu pciinisHion to land on Huid coasts, Hhores, and iHlands, for thu piirpoHC 

 of drying nets and curing fish, provided that they do not interrcrc with tliu rights 

 of private property or with the occupancy of British iinhcrniun. 



These are the onlv privileges accoriied for which any imHsihlc conipenNation can 

 be demanded. The liberty extends only to the sea fislicry : the salmon and shad 

 fisheries, and all other iishcries in rivers and mouths of rivers, are reserved exciu- 

 ■ivcly for Uritish fishermen. 



It becomes necessary at the outset to inquire what rights American ilshcrmen 

 and those of other nations possess, independently of Treaty, upon the ground that 

 the sea is the common property or all mankind. For the purposes ot fishing, the 

 territorial waters of every country along the sea coast extend three miles IVom 

 low-watermark; and beyond is the open ocean, free to all. In the case ol' bays 

 and gulfs, such only are territorial waters as do not exceed six miles in width at 

 the mouth, upon a straight line measured from headland to headland. All larger 

 bodies of water connected with the open sea form a part of it. And wherever the 

 mouth of a bay, gulf, or inlet exceeds the maximum width of six miles at its mouth, 

 and so loses the character of territorial or inland waters, the jurisdictional or 

 proprietary line, for the purpose of excluding foreigners from fishing, is measured 

 along the shore of the bay, according to its sinuosities, and the limit of exclusion is 

 three miles from low>water mark. 



The United States insist upon the maintenance of these rules, believing them 

 to conform to the well established principles of international law, niid to have 

 received a traditional recognition from other Povvers, including (ircal Britain. 



Moreover, the province of the present Commission is not to decide upon 

 questions of international law. In determining what, if any, coniponsation Great 

 Britain is entitled to receive from tiie United States, for the privilege of using lor 

 twelve years the in-shore sea fisheries, and for the permission to land on inioccupied 

 and desert shores for the purpose of curing tish and drying nets, it is the manifest 

 duty of the Commissioners to treat the question prnclically, and proceed upon 

 the basis of the status actually existing when the Treaty of Washington was 

 adopted. 



The Commissi ners who framed the Treaty of Washington, decided not "to 

 enter into an examination of the respective rights of the two countries under the 

 Treaty of 1818 and the general law of nations, but to approach the settlement of the 

 question on a comprehensive basis." 



What, then, was the practical extent of the privileges enjoyed by American 

 fishermen at and before the date of the Treaty of Washington ? 



Kven before the Reciprocity Treaty, adopted June 5, IS.H, the extreme and 

 untenable claims put forth at an earlier day had been abandoned; and. directly 

 after its abrogation, the Colonial authorities were instructed (April 12, 18()6) " that 

 American fishermen should not be interfered with, either by notice or otherwise, 

 unless found within three miles of the shore, or within three miles of a line drawn 

 across the mouth of a bay or creek which is less than ten geographical miles in width, in 

 conformity with the arrangement made with France in 1839." 



After that time, till 1870, the Canadian Go\ ernment issued licenses to foreign 

 fishermen. And when that system was discontii ued (May 14, i870) the Minister of 

 Marine and Fisheries gave orders to the Commander of the Government vessels 

 engaged in protecting the fisheries, not to interfere "with any American fishermen, 

 unless found within three miles of the shore, or within three mites of a live drawn across 

 the mouth of a bay or creek which is less than ten geographical miles in width. In the case 

 of any other bay — as the Bay of Chaleurs, for example — you will not admit any 

 United States' fishing-vessel or boat, or any American fishermen, inside of a line 

 drawn across at that part of such bay where its width does not exceed ten miles." It is 

 not apprehended that, for the purposes of the present Commission, there would be 

 any appreciable practical difference between extending the headland doctrine to 

 bays ten miles wide at the mouth, and limiting it to those which are only six miles 

 wide. 



But, as soon as these instructions were received in England, Her Majesty's 

 Government made haste to telegraph to the Governor-General its hope " that the 

 United States' fishermen will not be for the present prevented from fishing, except 

 within three miles of land, or in bays which are less than six miles broad at the 

 mouth." Accordingly, Mr. Peter Mitchell, the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, 



