CORRESPONDENCE 451 



No question as between a registry and license is a proper subject for their considera- 

 tion. They are not charged with enforcing any Laws or Regulations of the United 

 States. As to them, if the vessel is American she has the Treaty right, and they are 

 not at liberty to deny it." 



Proposition 6. "If any such matter were a proper subject for the consideration 

 of the ofi&cials of Newfoundland, the statement of this Department that vessels bearing 

 an American registry are entitled to exercise the Treaty right should be taken by such 

 officials as conclusive." 



His Majesty's Government are unable to agree to these propositions, except with 

 the reservations as to the status of American vessels under the Convention already 

 indicated, and with reference to proposition 6, they would submit that the assurance 

 to be given by the Department of State of the United States should be that the persons 

 by whom the fishery is to be exercised from the American vessels are inhabitants of 

 the United States. 



In point of fact the Colonial Government have informed His Majesty's Govern- 

 ment that they do not require an American vessel to produce a United States' fishing 

 license. The distinction between United States' registration and the possession of 

 a United States' fishing license is however, of some importance, inasmuch as a vessel 

 which, so far as the United States' Government are concerned, is at liberty both to 

 trade and to fish naturally calls for a greater measure of supervision by the Colonial 

 Government than a vessel fitted out only for fishing and debarred by the United 

 States' Government from trading; and information has been furnished to His Majesty's 

 Government by the Colonial Government which shows that the proceedings of Ameri- 

 can fishing-vessels in Newfoundland waters have in the past been of such a character 

 as to make it impossible, from the point of view of the protection of the Colonial 

 revenue, to exempt such vessels from the supervision authorized by the Colonial 

 Customs Law. 



His Majesty's Government now ttum to that part of Mr. Root's note which deals 

 with "The Foreign Fishing-Vessels Act, 1905." 



His Majesty's Government would have viewed with the strongest disapproval 

 any disposition on the part of the Colonial authorities to administer this Act in a 

 manner not consistent with His Majesty's Treaty obligations, but they are confident 

 that the United States' Government will readily admit that the fears expressed on 

 this head in Mr. Root's note have not been realized. 



They desire, however, to point out that, though the Act in question was passed 

 to give effect to the decision of the Colonial Government to withdraw from American 

 fishing-vessels the privileges which they had been allowed to enjoy for many years 

 previously of purchasing bait and supplies and of engaging crews in the ports of 

 the Colony, the provisions objectionable to the United States' Government which it 

 embodies are in no sense new. They will be found in "The Foreign Fishing-Vessels 

 Act, 1893." The present Act differs from the earlier Act in that it takes away, by 

 omission, from the Colonial Government the power conferred upon them by the earlier 

 Act of authorizing the issue of licenses to foreign fishing-vessels for the enjoyment of 

 the privileges mentioned. Allowing for this change, the provisions of the two Acts 

 are in all essential respects identical. The provisions as to boarding, bringing into 

 port, and searching appear in both Acts, and also the provisions as to the possession 

 of bait, outfits, and supplies being primd. facie evidence of the purchase of the same 

 in the Colonial jurisdiction, except that in the earlier Act there was a further pro- 

 vision, consequential on the authority which it conferred on the Colonial Government 



