171 



leges accorded to the citizens of the United States, wiiile the case made, and the 



evidence otTcrcd, claims (ianiages as well. 



Ilavo ;iny of our tisliinj;' vessels Icc-bowed — I believe that is the proper phrase 

 — Hrilisli lisliing- boats in lonncr years, or are thcv likely to do it again? Are 

 the fishing grounds hurt by "gurry " thrown into the water? Have families been 

 alarmed by American fishermen on shore? PJvery description of injury and 

 outrage, intentional or unintentional, great or small, going back to a period as far 

 as human memory extends, is laid before you as ground for damages. The Colonial 

 Goyerninents have erected lightiiouses on their coasts at dangerous points, and the 

 perils of navigation are thereby diniinisiied, so they present an estimate of the cost, 

 and a list of the number of tlie lightiiouses, and gravely ask you to take these 

 things into consideration in making up your award. Whatever has to do with 

 fishing, or fishermen, or fishing vessels, directly or indirectly, nearly or remotely, is 

 brouglit l)cfore you, and made the foundation of a claim. The British case and its 

 evidence seems to me to be a (bag-net, more extensive than the purse seine of which 

 we have iicard so nuicli, f;atiicring in everything tiiat can be thought of, and laying 

 il bei'ore you, il' l)\- any means, consciously or unconsciously, the amount of such 

 award as you siiail render may thereby l)e ailbctcd. Now it seems to us, under 

 these circumstances, to be a i)lain duty to ascertain, if we can, and to have i-ecorded 

 exactly, tiie grounds of your jurisdiction, as in your judgment they exist. We under- 

 stand, as I liave said, tiiat you are simply to determine the value of the inshore 

 fisiieries. and the value of the right of landing to cure fisii anrl dry nets, where this 

 can be done witliout interleriug witii private property, or British fishermen drying 

 nets. Krom tiie l)i'<;inuinL;' we iiave protested against any more extensive claim 

 being made ; this protest will l)e found distinctly and unequivocally made on page 8 

 of the " Answer," wiiere it is said : — 



'■SulHii' il iKiw in nliscivi', lliiil i1k' ilaiiii ofdrcrtt ISritain lo I Dinpcii.satod lor iillowiiir; United 



Sliitt's' tisln'iiiii'ii Ui liiiy li:iit ;iinl iitlier sii]nilii:s of Eiislisli sulijucts, litis no seniblanou of tbund.ation in 

 tlu' Tiviily, liywliidi iiu now lii^'lit ol tniflic in conceded." 



And in the recajjitulation at the close of the " Answer," the United States 

 maintain, tiiat the various incidental and reciprocal advantages of the Treaty, such 

 as the privileges of tradickiiig, and purchasing bait, and other supplies, are not a 

 sutijecl of compensation, because the Treaty of Washington confers no such rights 

 on the iiihabitaiits of tlie United States, who now enjoy them merely by sulferance, 

 and wild can at any time be depiived of them by the enforcement of existing laws, 

 or tlie re-enactment of former oppressive statuies. We say, first, tiiat you have 

 no jurisdiciiiiti over sucli matters as a suiiject of compensation, because the Treaty 

 confer.-^ none upon you, aad nothing o!' tlie kind is ilLiiominated in the bond. We 

 ^ay, seeoiuily, that we have no vested rights under the Treaty regariling commercial 

 intercourse of tliis description; and that as regards such intercourse, the inhabitants 

 of thv' I'niled States stand in the same relation to tlie subjects of Her Majesty as 

 they (lid before this Treaty was negotiated. These two points, though running 

 somewhat together, are ne\ertlieless distinct. And we base our contention upon 

 the plain language iA' the Treaty, in which not om word can be found relating to 

 ilie rigiit to l)uy or sell, to tradic or transfer cargoes — the whole language is 

 limited to the privilege of lUe inshore hsiieries, both in Artice XVI II, where these 

 jirivileges are conlerred. and in Article XXII, wiiich provides for the appointment 

 of this Cominissioi). Of course, it is not necessary for nie to call your attention to 

 tlie iaet tiiat Coinmissiuners, arliitiators, rehirees, and every other description of 

 tribunals, are limited in their powers by the terms of the instrument under which 

 they ael ; and that, if they include in any award a thini; upon w Inch they are not 

 aullioii/.ed to decide, liie entire awaril is thereby vitiated, and their whole action 

 beconu>s itllru rlri-s, and void. I cannot anticipate that there will be any denial of 

 this plain proposition. 



Now, the Commissioners will be pleased to observe, and our friends on the 

 other side to take nolicv', that the United States utterly repudiate any obligation 

 eitliei' to make coiiipensation, or pay damages for any of these matters ; that they 

 maintais,. as tlie\ have from the iirst, tiiai tlie (juestion submitted here is solely 

 and cNehiNively the adjustment of etpiivalents relating to the inshore fisheries; and 

 that the liuied States will not be under the sligiilest obligation to submit to an 

 award iiuluding anything more than tliesc things. Turning to the Treaty again, 

 we find thai there are Commercial Articles in it, but these are not Articles with 

 which this tribunal is concerned. From Article XXVI to XXXI, inclusive, 



