ARGUMENT OF MR. ROOT 223 



and powers created by the treaty of 1818, both in the correspondence 

 and action regarding the Newfoundland legislation of 1873 and 

 1874 and in the Evarts-Salisbury correspondence of 1878, 1879, 

 and 1880. 



So it rests, that for sixty-two years after this treaty of 1818 

 was made, there was no position taken by the government of Great 

 Britain that involved the assertion of a right to alter, or modify, 

 or limit, or restrain the discretion of the United States in determin- 

 ing the time and maimer in which the hberty to fish should be 

 exercised. 



On the contrary, time after time the government of Great 

 Britain, by its authorized representatives, assented to and asserted 

 and based its argument and position upon the non-existence of any 

 such right on the part of Great Britain and the existence of a 

 discretion on the part of the United States; and it rests, that for 

 thirty-seven years after the treaty was made, no British official, 

 however casually, ever expressed a doubt or question regarding 

 the right of the United States to exercise its own discretion in 

 determining the implements it should use in taking fish on the 

 treaty coast, and the times when it should take the fish. 



Now, I want to group together four expressions upon this 

 subject which have occurred in the transactions which I have been 

 detailing, but which have necessarily been presented at widely 

 separated points in my argument. 



First, Lord Bathurst, in the paper which formed the basis of 

 the negotiation in 18 15, described the American right under the 

 treaty of 1783 as the claim of an independent state to occupy and 

 use at its discretion any portion of the territory of another. 



Sir Charles Fitzpatrick: Just for convenience, will you give 

 the page ? 



Senator Root: Page 274 of the American Appendix. And, 

 I will observe there, that while it is true, as Chief Justice Fitz- 

 patrick observed yesterday, that Lord Bathurst is speaking with 

 reference to the prior letter to Mr. Adams, which he is answering, 

 it is not Mr. Adams's characterizing of the right which is expressed 

 here, it is Lord Bathurst's characterizing of the right. Mr. Adams 

 had claimed that the rights of the United States under the treaty 



