82 COUNTER-CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN. 



(P.) — Australia. 



AUSTRALIAN ACTS ARE LIMITED TO BRITISH SUBJECTS. 



TTnited States r£]^Q. Australian Pearl Fishery Acts are confessedly lim- 

 ase.p- • ited in their operation to British subjects. 



(Q-) — France. 



Ibid., p. 235. As to France, the United States Case says that the 

 Decree of the 10th May, 1862— 



went so far as to provide in terms that under certain circumstances 

 fisliing might be prohibited over areas of the sea beyond 3 miles from 

 shore. 



This Decree, of which Article 2 only is set forth in the 

 Appendix to the United States Case, is given at length in 

 Appendix, vol. the Appendix to this Counter-Case. Article 1 has the 

 1, p. 111. following paragraph : 



Les pecheurs sont tenus d'observer, dans les niers situ^es entre lea 

 cotes de France et celles du Royaume-Uni de la Grande-Bretague et 

 d'Irlande, les prescriptions de la Convention du 2 Aoftt, 1839, et du 

 Reglement International du 23 Juin, 1843. 



This shows that French subjects only are affected; for 

 the Government did, and could, bind its subjects only by 

 the Convention of 1839. 



Article 2 is as follows : 



Sur la demande des prud'hommes des pecheurs, de leurs d^l^gu^s et, 

 a ddfaut, des syndics des gens do mer, certaines peches peuvent Atre 

 temporairemeut interdites sur une 6tendne de mer an dela de 3 milles 

 du littoral, si cette mesure est commaud^e par I'iut^ret de la conserva- 

 tion des fonds on de la peche de poissons de passage. 



L'Arretd d'interdiction est pris par le Prcfet Maritime. 



It is not alleged in the United States Case that the power 

 thus given has been acted on as against foreigners, and it 

 is submitted that Article 2 was not intended to authorize 

 bye-laws affecting foreigners beyond territorial limits. 



The construction which supposes the Decree to apply to 

 foreigners assumes it to assert an authority to prohibit 

 fishing to all nations, unlimited in the selection of the kinds 

 of fish to which the prohibition may apply, either as to their 

 being "located" near French coasts, or as to their 

 95 being those in which France has " an interest, an 

 industry, and a commerce;" and assumes that the 

 prohibitiou may extend to mere "fishes of passage," in 

 which the interest of France is only that which it lias in 

 common with other nations, and may apply to every part 

 of the high seas. 



Assuming the Decree confined to French subjects, no 

 difficulty is caused by this absence of restriction. If 

 extended to foreigners, it goes beyond anything for which 

 the United States contend even in the present case. If all 

 nations made corresponding law.s, some as to one fish and 

 some as to another, giving effect to the same by "necessary 

 measures" and "reasonable force," the dangers of the sea 

 would be aggravated in no slight degree. 



