ARGUMENT OF MR. ROOT 65 



fish is pre-empted for nearly two months by the Newfoundland 

 fishermen with his cod-trap and contrivances before the American 

 fisherman, who uses the bultow, is at liberty to go up on that coast 

 and set out his bultow. When he gets there he finds the places 

 where he would put his bultows for the purpose of taking cod-fish 

 pre-empted by the cod-traps, again protecting the shore fisherman 

 as against the vessel fisherman. 



As I have said before, I am not blaming these people for wanting 

 to protect themselves, but that is what they are doing and the effect 

 of it all is to substitute a fishery dictated by the wants, the opinions, 

 the local option of these dwellers in these Httle fishing communities 

 along the coasts for the great fishing interests you have illustrated 

 upon the shores of Holland and Scotland, to substitute the little 

 humble fishers' daily tale of fish for a great fishery such as that which 

 has built up the power and strength of Holland, and is one of 

 the great sources of the wealth of Scotland, England, and Ireland 

 to-day. 



That is prohibited to us because these laws are the laws of shore 

 fishermen, dictated by their wants and unrestrained by the large 

 considerations which would apply to the whole of this fishery if it 

 were the fishery of a single nation and a single government were 

 to weigh in the balance the broader and the narrower interests. 



Now, we come to still further expressions of purpose, a little 

 different in origin, not originating with the fishermen, but originat- 

 ing with the government of Newfoundland. This has reference 

 to Sir Robert Bond's Question Six proposition. He has discovered 

 that the Americans are not at liberty to go into any bays, or har- 

 bors, or inlets, or creeks on the coast of Newfoundland, and it is his 

 purpose, he says, to keep them out. I read from p. 414 of the United 

 States Counter-Case Appendix. He says: 



" I venture to go further than the learned counsel for the United States 

 in his admission" — 



he is referring to an admission made in the Halifax Case — 



"and to express the opinion, after very careful consideration, that American 

 fishermen not only have no right to land and seine herrings, but they have 

 no right to enter into the harbors, creeks, or coves from Cape Ray to Rameau 

 Islands, and from Cape Ray to Quirpon Islands, for the purpose of buying 



