xcu INTRODUCTION 



can counsel based the right to enjoy the liberty of fishing, free from local 

 regulation or to have a voice in any regulation found advisable or neces- 

 sary, but the Tribunal granted in substance the consequences which 

 would have followed from the establishment of the principle for which 

 they contended. To the uninitiated this would seem to suggest a com- 

 promise, and we know on the highest authority that the award of the 

 Tribunal was in some points, at least, a compromise. Thus, the learned 

 President of the Tribunal, Dr. Lammasch, recently published an article * 

 in which he says that some of the Hague awards ' contained keen and 

 penetrating holdings of a juridical nature. Especially was this the 

 case in the three awards in which the writer of this article was Presi- 

 dent of the Tribunal: The Mascat case between Great Britain and 

 France, the Orinoco case between the United States of America and 

 Venezuela, and the Newfoundland and Canadian Fisheries case between 

 Great Britain and the United States of America. To be sure the 

 judgment in the last named case also contained elements of a compromise 

 for which, however, the Tribunal had received special and exceptional 

 authorization." ^ 



Viewing the award of the Tribunal upon Question I, considered as a 

 whole, it may be said that in form the award is opposed to the conten- 

 tions of the United States on every position advanced by American 

 counsel. In substance, by virtue of the form of submission and the 

 admission of British counsel, the award is favorable to the contention 

 of the United States, because it holds that neither Great Britain 

 nor Newfoundland can alone determine the reasonableness of any reg- 

 ulation, and that if the reasonableness be contested it "must be decided 

 not by either of the Parties, but by an impartial authority in accordance 

 with the principles hereinabove laid down, and in the manner proposed 

 in the recommendations made by the Tribunal in virtue of Article IV 

 of the agreement." ' 



Without discussing this procedure in detail, it is sufficient to say 

 that the Tribunal held that future municipal laws, ordinances, or rules 



' Das Recht, March lo, igii, p. 148. 



^ " Was aber die Schiedsspriiche betrifft, so enthielten einige sehr eingehende Begriin- 

 dungen juristischer Art. Insbesondere war dies der Fall bei den drei Spriichen, bei denen 

 der Verfasser dieses Aufsatzes als Vorsitzender fungierte. (Maskatfall zwischen Gross- 

 britannien und Frankreich, Orinocofall zwischen den Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika 

 und Venezuela, Fall der neufundlandischen und kanadischen Fischereien zwischen Gross- 

 britannien und den Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika; freilich enthielt das Urleil im letzt- 

 genannten Fall auck Elemente eines Vergleiches ; hierzu hatte das Schiedsgericht aber besondere, 

 ausserordentliche Vollmacht erhalten.)" 



A careful reading and rereading of the special agreement of January 27, 1909 fails to 

 disclose to the present writer the slightest foundation for any "special and exceptional 

 authorization" to compromise a legal question. 



^Appendix, p. sos; Oral Argument, p. 1446. 



