258 FISHERIES ARBITRATION AT THE HAGUE 



national intercourse, to get on with each other, make modalities 

 and agree upon the best way for the industry to be profitably pur- 

 sued, provided that they are allowed to. 



A very good illustration of what I am now saying is to be found 

 in the history of the so-called modus of 1888. Somebody spoke 

 of it here the other day as being still in force in Canada. Well, 

 it was an informal agreement dealing with a lot of these subjects 

 that we are agonizing about here, binding for only two years. 

 Twenty years ago its binding force ended. The two countries 

 have gone on under it ever since because common sense ruled 

 them, and under it each country finds that its interests are better 

 served by the friendly intercourse that it provides than they 

 would be by breaking up again and going to quarreling. The 

 debates upon it in the Canadian ParKament — active and exciting 

 debates — have developed argument as to whether it shoidd con- 

 tinue, but the common sense of Canada has prevailed. Canada 

 has become a nation with a sense of national responsibility, of 

 a national future, and of the value and importance of commer- 

 cial relations, and it is her own will that she continues them and 

 she is not concerned by any narrow and limited view of the people 

 of a particular locality. 



Sir Charles Fitzpatrick: And it is practically not her only 

 industry ? 



Senator Root: Well, it is not; that is true. It is not practically 

 her only industry, and that makes it easier for her. The same thing 

 is illustrated by the way in which we have got on under the modus 

 vivendi of 1906 and the modus of 1907 regarding this same Newfound- 

 land matter. Sir Edward Grey, the American Secretary of State, 

 the American Ambassador to Great Britain, the British Ambassador 

 to Washington — none of them had any trouble about it except 

 that Newfoundland screamed loudly over Great Britain undertaking 

 to make an agreement which Newfoundland considered to be 

 overriding her constitutional rights, and it was -only because it 

 was a necessity to the prosecution of the idea of having an arbitra- 

 tion that the modus was made. It was only because of such a 

 necessity that Great Britain was able to stand up and insist upon 

 it against the violent protests of Newfoundland. 



