INTRODUCTION lix 



It will be noted that, in determining the question of reasonableness, 

 the tribunal was influenced by two considerations; namely, the form 

 of submission of the question, and the admission of counsel of Great 

 Britain during the argument. The question of form has been considered 

 in sufficient detail for the present purpose. The question of the admis- 

 sion of coimsel must be examined in order that the ratio decidendi be 

 understood. For example, in presenting the British Case to the tribunal 

 Sir Robert Finlay stated that — 



"It is not claimed for the British Government, or for the Colonial Govern- 

 ments, that they can determine the question whether any regulation is reasonable. 

 All that they claim is the right to make reasonable regulations, and if the point is 

 raised as to whether any regulation is reasonable or not, it is not for the Colo- 

 nial Government, it is not for the United States Government, to determine whether 

 that regulation is or is not reasonable. It is for this Tribunal, to which the parties 

 can, if such a difference arises, come."' 



In the course of his argument. Sir William Robson, then Attorney- 

 General, quoted from Lord Salisbury's note to Mr. Evarts, then 

 Secretary of State, that "Her Majesty's Government will readily 

 admit — what is, indeed, self-evident — that British sovereignty, as 

 regards those waters, is limited in its scope by the engagement of the 

 treaty of Washington, which cannot be modified or affected by any 

 municipal legislation," and added that "this is the position we take 

 to-day." ^ That is to say, that British sovereignty is limited in its 

 scope. In the latter portions of his argument he represents the 

 American negotiators of the Convention of 1818 as saying to the 

 British negotiators, " ' you must not exercise your jurisdictional powers 

 or any powers that may be retained to you in any way which 

 operates unfairly as between American and English fishermen.' That 

 is what the words say on one side. That is the limitation upon our 

 sovereignty." ' 



British counsel thus admitted in the course of argument that neither 

 Great Britain nor its colonies could alone determine the reasonableness 

 of local regulation; that is to say, Sir Robert Finlay considered that 

 Great Britain could not alone determine the reasonableness of fishing 

 regulations affecting American fishermen in the exercise of their fishing 

 liberties, and Sir William Robson stated the reason for such concession, 

 namely, that the Convention of 1818 was a limitation upon British 

 sovereignty. 



But the form of submission and the admission of British counsel 



1 Oral Argument, Vol. I, p. 176. ' Oral Argument, Vol. II, p. 999. 



' Oral Argument, Vol. II, p. 1037. 



