APPENDIX TO CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN. LSS 
‘““THE ARGUMENT. 
“The fate of the second of these propositions depends largely upon that of the first, 
for if the jurisdiction and dominion of the United States as to these waters be not 
sustained the restrictive Acts of Congress must fall, and if our jurisdiction shall be 
sustained small question can be made as to the power of Congress to regulate fishing 
and sealing within our own waters. The grave question, one important to all the 
nations of the civilized world, as well as to the United States and Great Britain, is 
‘the dominion of Behring’s Sea.’ 
“THE THREE MILE LIMIT. 
“Concerning the doctrine of international law establishing what is known as the 
marine league belt, which extends the jurisdiction of a nation into adjacent seas for 
the distance of one marine league, or 3 miles from its shores, and following all the 
indentations and sinuosities of its coast, there is at this day no room for discussion. 
It must be accepted as the settled law of nations. It is sustained by the highest 
authorities, law-writers, and jurists. It has been sanctioned by the United States 
since the foundation of the Government. It was affirmed by Mr. Jefferson, Secre- 
tary of State, as early as 1793, and has been reaffirmed by his successors—Mr. Pick- 
ering, in 1796; Mr. Madison, in 1807; Mr. Webster, in 1842; Mr. Buchanan, in 1849; 
Mr. Seward, in 1862, 1863, and 1864; Mr. Fish, in 1875; Mr. Evarts, in 1879 and 1881; 
and Mr. Bayard, in 1886. (Wheaton’s ‘International Law,’ vol. i, sec. 32, pp. 100 
and 109.) 
“‘Sanctioned thus by an unbroken line of precedents covering the first century of 
our national existence, the United States would not abandon this doctrine if they 
could; they could not if they would. 
‘“SLANDLOCKED SEAS. 
“Well grounded as is this doctrine of the law of nations, it is no more firmly 
established as a part of the international code than that other principle which gives 
to a nation supremacy, jurisdiction, dominion over its own inland waters, gulfs, 
bays, and seas. If a sea is entirely inclosed by the territories of a nation, and has 
no other communication with the ocean than by a channel, of which that nation may 
take possession, it appears that such a sea is no less capable of being occupied and 
becoming property than the land, and it ought to follow the fate of the country 
that surrounds it. The Mediterranean in former times was absolutely inclosed 
within the territories of the Romans, and that people, by rendering themselves 
masters of the strait which joins it to the ocean might subject the Mediterranean 
to their Empire, and assume the dominion over it. ‘They did not by such proceed- 
ing injure the rights of other nations, a particular sea being manifestly 
114 designed by nature for the use of the countries and nations that surround it. 
(Vattel’s ‘Law of Nations,’ pp. 129 and 130.) 
“Chancellor Kent, in 1826, before the doctrine as to the marine league limit was 
as firmly established as it now is, says: 
‘¢ <T¢ is difficult to draw any precise or determined conclusion amid the variety of 
opinions as to the distance a State may lawfully extend its exclusive dominion over 
the seas adjoining its territories and beyond those portions of the sea which are 
embraced by harbours, gulfs, bays, and estuaries, and over which its jurisdiction 
unquestionably extends.’ (Kent, vol. i, p. 28.) 
“JURISDICTION OF STATES. 
“Tt thus appears that, while in 1826 the limit of the marine belt was unsettled, 
the jurisdiction of a State over its inland waters was unquestioned. 
“In the laws of nations bays are regarded as a part of the territory of the 
country when their dimensions and configurations are such as to show that the nation 
occupying the coast also occupies the bay as a part of its territory.’ (Manning’s 
‘Law of Nations,’ p. 120.) 
“¢ ‘An inland sea or lake belongs to the State in which it is territorially situated. 
As illustrations, may be mentioned the inland lakes whose entire body is within the 
United States, and the Sea of Azof.’ (Wheaton’s ‘International Law,’ vol. i, sec. 31.) 
“« ¢ Rivers and inland Jakes and seas, when contained in a particular State, are sub- 
ject to the Sovereign of such State.’ (Idem, vol. iii, sec. 300.) 
“‘¢Undoubtedly it is upon this principle of international law that our right to 
dominion over such vast inland waters as the great lakes, Boston Harbour, Long 
Island Sound, Delaware and Chesapeake Bays, Albemarle Sound, and the Bay of San 
Francisco rests. This country, in 1793, considered the whole of Delaware Bay to be 
within our territorial jurisdiction, and it rested its claim upon these authorities, 
which admit that gulfs, channels, and arms of the sea belong to the people within 
whose land they are encompassed.’ (Kent’s Com., vol.i, p. 528.) 
