ARGUMENT OF MR. ROOT 279 



SiK Charles Fitzpatrick: You would include bays in "cham- 

 bers formed by headlands " ? 



Senator Root: I should say so; yes. I should say so. 



Sir Charles Fitzpatrick: It is curious they do not use the 

 word "bays," is it not? 



Senator Root: "Chambers formed by headlands" is a much 

 more comprehensive expression I should say; and it was, you will 

 recall, the expression that had been used in the controversy about 

 the King's chambers that had been going on; and it included in the 

 British assertion of jurisdiction very large bodies of water. 



Judge Gray: The "Argus" was claimed within a Hne drawn 

 from headlands a hundred miles apart — those curvatures or con- 

 vexities of the coast. 



Senator Root: Yes. Now let us see what reception that 

 proposal of Mr. Madison's met with on the part of Great Britain. 

 I will ask the Tribunal to turn to the Counter-Case Appendix of 

 the United States at p. 95, where there is a report from Mr. Monroe 

 and Mr. Pinckney, who are the negotiators of the treaty of 1806. 

 Just below the middle of the page, after speaking of some other 

 things, in this report dated the nth November, 1806, they say: 



"The question of blockade, and others connected with it, may, we think, 

 be satisfactorily arranged. They will agree also to acknowledge our juris- 

 diction to the extent of a league from our coasts; we have claimed that acknowl- 

 edgment to the extent of three leagues." 



So much for that letter. The next letter is the Holland and 

 Auckland letter on p. 61 of the British Appendix, to which I have 

 already referred. And I beg the Tribunal to consider that letter 

 now with reference to that proposal of Mr. Madison, which was 

 the thing that the American negotiators were urging, and that the 

 British negotiators were considering; and the Tribunal will see 

 that that is the reason why, in the fourth paragraph to which the 

 President refers, he discusses the subject of the space between head- 

 lands. That is why after defining the limit of maritime jurisdiction 

 at three miles — the general limit of maritime jurisdiction — they 

 go on to speak of particular circumstances resulting from imme- 



