154 FISHERIES ARBITRATION AT THE HAGUE 



learned friends on the other side had fallen into an error in suppos- 

 ing that the Attorney-General of Newfoundland, in 1855, when he 

 reported that there were no regulations as to fishing, was mistaken. 

 The whole subject of Newfoundland appears to have been covered 

 and codified in the Act of 1824, which you will remember, I presume 

 — British Case Appendix, p. 567. This is: 



"An Act to repeal several Laws relating to the Fisheries carried on upon 

 the Banks and Shores of Newfoundland, and to make Provision for the better 

 Conduct of the said Fisheries for Five Years, and from thence to the End 

 of the then next Session of Parhament." 



It goes on in the first article and repeals 10 and 11 William III, 

 IS George III, 26 George III, and 29 George III, and then covers 

 the ground pretty fuUy. It reproduces the provisions of the old 

 Act of 1688 regarding the French claims, the Act of 1819, and the 

 Order-in-Council of i8ig, all in one paragraph (12) bunching 

 them together as being subject to the same general provision: 



"That it shall and may be lawful for His Majesty, His Heirs and Suc- 

 cessors, by Advice of His or their Council, from time to time to give such 

 Orders and Instructions to the Governor of Newfoundland, or to any Officer 

 or Officers on that Station, as he or they shall deem proper and necessary 

 to fulfill the Purposes of any Treaty or Treaties now in force between His 

 Majesty and any Foreign State or Power." 



It reproduces the various prohibitions against the casting of 

 ballast overboard, against the casting of anchor at places where 

 it would hinder the drawing of nets, against net interference, or 

 steahng or purloining of nets or fish. All these are reproduced, 

 but the statute wiped out all other provisions and laws applying to 

 fishing. The statute, as you will see by the last article, at the top 

 of page 570, is to be in force only for five years and thence to the 

 end of the next session of Parliament. So that everything that 

 there had been, in so far as it continued in the year 18 18, was 

 gathered together in this Act of 1824, and a five-year Hmit was put 

 upon it. The reason was quite plain. They evidently then had 

 come to the conclusion to give Newfoundland a legislative body 

 of its own, and were making this statute so as to carry it over until 

 there should be a legislature of Newfoundland itself. 



At p. 329 of the United States Counter-Case Appendix, Sir 



