210 



bef.wccn tho Governments directly, I presume you will rejoice with me in rmding 

 tliiit it is not practically before us, and tiiat we need not troui)le ourselves concern- 

 ing:^ it. If it had ap|)earcd in this case that there was fishing carried on to any 

 appreciable extent within the large bays, more than six miles wide at the headlands, 

 and at a distance of more tliaii three miles from the contour of the shores of those 

 bays, the United States would have contended tiuit their citizens, in common with 

 all the rest of mankind, were entitled to lish in such j^reat bodies of water, as lone 

 as they kept themselves more tiian three miles from tiie shore. In short, they would 

 have contended, as it bus been contended in the Brief iiled in this case, that where 

 the bays arc more than six miles in width, from headland to headland, they 

 are to be treated in tliis respect, for fishing purposes, as parts of the open sea ; but 

 the evidence, as I said before, has eliminated all that matter from the iiupiiry. The 

 only bodies ol" water as to which any such question can arise, are, in the first place, 

 the liay of Fundy. Now, the right of American lishermen to enter and lish in that 

 bay, was decided by arbitratitm in the ease of the schooner " Washington," and Her 

 Majesty's (jovernment have uniformly acquiesced in that decision. So, as to that 

 body oi' water, the rights of the citizens of the United States must be regarded as 

 fps (uljmliratii. In addition, however, it turns out, tiiat within the body of the Bay 

 of Fiuidy tlicre has not been any fishing more than three miles from the shore, for 

 a period of many years. One oi' hie Britisii witnesses said that it was forty years 

 since the niaeki rel tishery ceased in the Hay of Kundv. At all events there is no 

 cviflcnce in this case, of fishing of any description in tlie body of the JJay of h'undy, 

 more than three miles from the shore, and this fact, in addition to the decision in 

 the " Washington " ease, disposes of that. 



The next body of water is the Hay of .Miramichi ; as to which it will turn out, 

 by an inspection ot" the map on which the Commissioners appointed under the 

 Reciprocity Treaty marked out the lines reserved from free tishing, on the ground 

 that they were mouths of rivers, that the mouth of the River Miramichi comes almost 

 down to the headlands of the bay. Voii will remember that tiie report of the 

 Commission on the Recipioeity Treaty is referred to in the Treaty of Washington, 

 and that the same places excluiled by their decision remain excluded now. SV'hat 

 is left .' Tiie narrow space below tiic point marked out a.-; the moutii of the River 

 Miramichi. and within the headlands of the bay, is so small tiiat there can he no 

 fishing tiiere of any conse(|uence, ;in(l no evidence! of any (ishing tlicre at all has 

 been introduced. So far as the May of Miraniiehi goes, therefore. 1 cannot see that 

 the headiaiul i|nestion need trouble you .at all. 



Tlien comes the Hay nf ("lialeiiis, and in tlie Hay of Ciialeurs, whatever lishing 

 has liecn found to exist, seems to have been within three miles of the shores of the 

 l;ay, in the body of the Hay of Chnleurs. I am not .aware of any evidence of 

 fishing; and it is very curious that this Hav of Ciialeurs, alio'it which there has 

 been so miieii eontroversv hereloibre, can he su siiminarilv dismissed from tho 

 present investigation. 1 siipjiose that a great deal of faetitioiis iinpoiiance has 

 been given to the Hay of Chalems, Irom the custom among tisherineii. and almtist 

 universal a !i'eneralii)n ;ig(), of u liicli we have lie.ard so much, to spe;d< of the whole 

 of tli(> tinir of St. Lawrence i)\ that term. Over ;»nd over again, and particularly 

 among tlie older witnesses, we have noticed that when they spuke of goini; to the 

 (iiiif 1)1' St. Lawrence, they spoke of it bv the term " Hay of Ciialeurs,"" but in the 

 Hav oi (li.ileiirs proper, in the body of the b.iy, I cannot liiid any evidence of any 

 fishing at .ill. 1 iliink. there!'ore, that the Hay of ('hal<'urs may be dismissed from 

 our eoiisider.itioii. 



There are two kw three other bndies oi' water, .as to which a possilile tlieoretical 

 (piestion in.iv lie r.iiscd. Imi their names have not been iiitrodiieed into the 

 testimony on this occasion, from first to last. The headland (|iiesti(Ui. therefore, 

 gentlemen, I lielieve may be dismissed as, for the purposes of this iiupiirs. wholly 

 uniinpnit.'tnt ; and .ilthongh I am not authorized to speak for my iriend. the Hritisn 

 A^iiil, and s.iy that he eoneiirs with me. yet I sh.dl be v«!ry much surprised if I 

 liiid ,iny dilh'ient views from those that I linv(! expressed taken on the othi-r side. 

 If, in .irgiiMient. other views should be brought I'orward, or if it should seem to voiir 

 Honours, ill eoiisideriiig the siilijeet. that the rpiestion has .in importance which it 

 has not in my view, then I can only refer vou to the Hrief that has been tiled, and 

 insist upon the principles which the United States have heretofore maiiitaincxi 

 on that snbieel. For the present. I congratulate you, .as 1 do myself, that no 

 grave and vexed question of international law nee<l trouble you in coming to a 

 conclusion. 



