278 FISHERIES ARBITRATION AT THE HAGUE 



Of course when I say Great Britain made no claim, I have to 

 depend upon a negative. There is none here that I can find, and 

 the only way I can prove that is by reading all these documents, 

 from which I am sure the Court will excuse me. 



Judge Gray: I think, Mr. Root, it was with reference to that 

 absence that you speak of in evidence of the assertion or recognition 

 of these other large bays that Mr. Ewart seemed to depend upon 

 what he called the conventional recognition or agreement between 

 the two parties. 



Senator Root: Yes. The sole suggestion that he had to 

 make of any assertion or claim was by ascribing his meaning to 

 the word "bays" in this treaty. 



I have said that the United States sought to include these large 

 bodies of water within Jurisdiction, and that Great Britain refused 

 it. That appears from the correspondence which begins on p. 60 

 of the British Appendix, a letter from Mr. Madison to Messrs. 

 Monroe and Pinckney, who were the plenipotentiaries engaged 

 in London in negotiating the treaty of 1806. The third paragraph,, 

 just below the middle of the page, contains the following statement 

 from Mr. Madison, who was then Secretary of State: 



"With this example, and with a view to what is suggested by our own 

 experience, it may be expected that the British Government will not refuse 

 to concur in an article to the following effect: 



"'It is agreed that all armed vessels belonging to either of the parties 

 engaged in war, shall be effectually restrained by positive orders, and penal 

 provisions, from seizing, searching, or otherwise interrupting or disturbing 

 vessels to whomsover belonging, whether outward or inward bound, within 

 the harbors or the chambers formed by headlands, or anywhere at sea, within 

 the distance of four leagues from the shore, or from a right Hne from one head- 

 land to another; it is further agreed, that, by like orders and provisions, all 

 armed vessels shall be effectually restrained by the party to which they respec- 

 tively belong, from stationing themselves, or from roving or hovering so near 

 the entry of any of the harbors or coasts of the other, as that merchantmen 

 shall apprehend their passage to be unsafe, or in danger of being set upon 

 and surprised.'" 



That is a clear proposal, is it not, to include by convention within 

 the jurisdiction of the two parties chambers formed by headlands, 

 and a territorial zone which extends for four leagues from a line 

 drawn from headland to headland ? 



