Ixxiv INTRODUCTION 



fisheries. When the Act of Newfoundland was transmitted by the 

 British Minister to Secretary Fish, he called attention to the fact that 

 the suspension of Newfoundland laws was qualified, and that "the pro- 

 viso referred to contemplates a restriction, in point of time, of the herring 

 fisheries on the western coast of the island." Mr. Fish evidently believed 

 that a right to regulate would not arise by implication, but solely from 

 the express provisions of the treaty. 



"I regret, therefore, that the Act of the Legislature of Newfoundland, which re- 

 serves a right to restrict the American right of fishing, within certain periods of the 

 year, does not appear to be such consent on the part of the Colony of Newfoundland 

 to the application of the stipulations and provisions of Articles i8 to 25 of the 

 TYeaty." 1 



He, therefore, considered the Newfoundland Act unacceptable by 

 reason of the reservation, and refused, on behalf of the United States, 

 to extend to Newfoundland the provisions of the Treaty of Washington, 

 unless the act was amended by the omission of the right to regulate 

 the time and manner of prosecuting the fisheries within Newfoundland 

 waters. After much discussion Newfoundland yielded to Secretary 

 Fish's objections, eliminated the unacceptable proviso, and added the 

 words "any law of this Colony to the contrary notwithstanding." ^ 



If it be borne in mind that the terms of the grant of the Treaty of 

 1871 and the Convention of 1818 were identical, the importance of 

 Mr. Fish's interpretation of the Treaty of 1871 becomes at once evident. 

 For if the Treaty of 1871 did not give Newfoundland the right to regu- 

 late the time and manner of fishing, it is difficult to see how the Conven- 

 tion of 1 81 8 gave this right, and if the United States was not to be bound 

 by existing legislation, regulating the time and manner of fishing, a for- 

 tiori, it was not to be affected by future legislation to which it did not 

 consent. The transaction is not merely important as an expression of 

 the American view of the status created by the grant of 187 1 and of 

 1818, but the action of Newfoundland, in modifying existing legislation 

 under pressure from the United States, taxed Great Britain and New- 

 foundland with knowledge of the American view that the fisheries under 

 the Treaty of 187 1 were not to be regulated so far as the United States 

 was concerned without its consent, and the modified statute of New- 

 foundland must be considered as a concession to, if not an acceptance 

 of, this view. The modified act being thus xmobjectionable, Newfound- 

 land was admitted under proclamation to the benefit of the treaty. 



Further light is thrown upon the subject by the Halifax award of 

 1877 provided for by Article XXII just quoted of the Treaty of 



' Appendix, U. S. Counter Case, p. 196. 2 Appendix, British Case, p. 706. 



