16 
The regulations under the Treaty have not been fixed by the 
respective Governments, but even after their ratification and 
promulgation by the United States Government, it is doubtful 
if it will bring about the reforms contemplated, as it is 
quite within the possibilities that in some instances the 
question of State sovereignty may be raised, and the 
provisions of the Treaty held to be an unwarrantable inter- 
ference by Congress regarding a matter in which the State Legis- 
lature is supreme. It is evident that the only remedy for the con- 
ditions existing on Puget Sound—threatening the destruction of 
the salmon industry—is voluntary compliance with the existing 
law on the part of those engaged in the business, and a universal 
and earnest determination to protect and perpetuate a great 
industry for the benefit of their posterity by the people of the State 
of Washington. 
A QUESTION OF JURISDICTION. 
When British Columbia entered the Canadian Confederation 
in 1871, the Terms of Union included the following item :—Canada 
will assume and defray the charges for the protection and 
encouragement of the fisheries. 
Under this agreement it has been contended that the Dominion 
should bear all the expenses of administration of the fisheries, 
while the revenue derived should form part of the revenue of the 
Province. The Dominion assumed the position of being supreme 
in the premises, made rules and regulations, established a fisheries 
protective service, fixed the cost of fishing leases and licences, and 
retained the revenue collected, despite objections and protests on 
the part of the Province. As already shown, the amount con- 
tributed to the Dominion from this source is far in excess of the 
expenses incurred in the administration of the fisheries, and the 
Province has long sought a settlement of its claims. In 1898, in a 
case submitted to the Judicial Committee of the Imperial Privy 
Council, it was decided that inland and tidal fisheries were the 
property of the Provinces; that, in a general way, fish, as a prop- 
erty or asset, would seem to belong to the Provinces; but 
jurisdiction in respect to legislation and the right to license was 
not defined, and the rights in regard to fishing within the three- 
mile limit were not specifically determined. Many attempts have 
been made to arrive at an adjustment of these important questions, 
and the Dominion Government and the Government of British 
Columbia have agreed to submit a case to the Privy Council. One 
question will be, briefly: \Who owns the fish in British Columbia? 
