cvi INTRODUCTION 



use made of this statement by Mr. Root evidently influenced the British 

 Government to examine the laws and regulations in effect at the signature 

 of the Convention of 1818 as appears from the following passage of a 

 telegram, dated August 8, 1906, from Lord Elgin, Secretary of State for 

 the Colonies to the Governor of Newfoundland: 



"Light dues were presumably not levied in 1818, . . . and fishing-ships were 

 exempted from entry at Custom-house, and required only to make a report on 

 first arrival and on clearing (see same Act). United States vessels could, on the 

 basis of the status quo in 1818, only be asked to make report at custom-house on 

 arrival and on clearing." ' 



The controversy was fortunately ended by the decision of the 

 Tribunal which apparently safeguards the legitimate rights of American 

 fishermen in Newfoundland waters without depriving the local authori- 

 ties of the opportunity to prevent by appropriate supervision the abuse 

 of the treaty right. 



Question IV 



It will not have escaped attention that Questions I, II, and III 

 related to fishing within what are commonly called the treaty waters. 

 The next question deals with the right of American fishermen to use for 

 certain specific purposes the waters in which, by the Convention of 1818, 

 the United States renounced, for its inhabitants, the fishing liberty of 

 1783. The reason for the renunciatory clause of the Convention of 1818 

 has already been explained. The United States surrendered liberties 

 which it possessed under the Treaty of 1783 in order to secure forever 

 the liberty to take, dry, and cure fish within certain specified portions of 

 the British coast in North America, and the renunciation was the con- 

 sideration for the grant of 1818. The question of regulation did not 

 arise within non-treaty waters, because by express provision the United 

 States renounced on behalf of its inhabitants the right to fish on the non- 

 treaty coast, and the right cannot exist to regulate the exercise of a non- 

 existent liberty. It was foreseen, however, that American fishermen in 

 distress, removed from the basis of supplies and far away from home, 

 might find it necessary to enter the bays or harbors of the non-treaty 

 coasts "for the purpose of shelter and of repairing damages therein, or 

 purchasing wood, and of obtaining water." The American negotiators 

 sought to obtain the right to purchase bait, but the British commissioner 

 rejected the proposal. Great Britain was unwilling to grant American 

 fishermen the right to enter the non-treaty waters whenever it should 



' U. S. Counter Case, p. 9. 



