AWARD OF THE TRIBUNAL 503 



authority in accordance with the principles hereinabove laid down, and in the 

 manner proposed in the recommendations made by the Tribunal in virtue of 

 Article IV of the Agreement. 



The Tribunal further decides that Article IV of the Agreement is, as stated by counsel 

 of the respective Parties at the argument, permanent in its effect, and not termi- 

 nable by the expiration of the General Arbitration Treaty of 1908, between Great 

 Britain and the United States. 



In execution, therefore, of the responsibilities imposed upon this Tribunal in regard to 

 Articles II, III and IV of the Special Agreement, we hereby pronounce in their 

 regard as follows: 



As TO Article II 



Pursuant to the provisions of this. Article, hereinbefore cited, either Party has called 

 the attention of this Tribunal to acts of the other claimed to be inconsistent 

 with the true interpretation of the Treaty of 1818. 



But in response to a request from the Tribunal, recorded in Protocol No. XXVI of 

 igth July, for an exposition of the grounds of such objections, the Parties replied 

 as reported in Protocol No. XXX of 28th July to the following effect: 



His Majesty's Government considered that it would be unnecessary to call upon 

 the Tribunal for an opinion under the second clause of Article II, in regard to 

 the executive act of the United States of America in sending warships to the 

 territorial waters in question, in view of the recognized motives of the United 

 States of America in taking this action and of the relations maintained by their 

 representatives with the local authorities. And this being the sole act to which 

 the attention of this Tribunal has been called by His Majesty's Government, 

 no further action in their behalf is required from this Tribunal under Article II. 



The United States of America presented a statement in which their claim that 

 specific provisions of certain legislative and executive acts of the Governments 

 of Canada and Newfoundland were inconsistent with the true interpretation 

 of the Treaty of 1818 was based on the contention that these provisions were 

 not "reasonable" within the meaning of Question I. 



After calling upon this Tribunal to express an opinion on these acts, pursuant to the 

 second clause of Article II, the United States of America pointed out in that 

 statement that under Article III any question regarding the reasonableness of 

 any regulation might be referred by the Tribunal to a Commission of expert 

 specialists, and expressed an intention of asking for such reference under certain 

 circumstances. 



The Tribunal having carefully considered the counter-statement presented on behalf 

 of Great Britain at the session of August 2nd, is of opinion that the decision on 

 the reasonableness of these regulations requires expert information about the 

 fisheries themselves and an examination of the practical effect of a great number 

 of these provisions in relation to the conditions surrounding the exercise of the 

 liberty of fishery enjoyed by the inhabitants of the United States, as contemplated 

 by Article III. No further action on behalf of the United States is therefore 

 required from this Tribunal under Article II. 



As TO Article III 



As provided in Article III, hereinbefore cited and above referred to, "any question 

 regarding the reasonableness of any regulation, or otherwise, which requires 

 an examination of the practical effect of any provisions surrounding the exercise 

 of the liberty of fishery enjoyed by the inhabitants of the United States, or which 

 requires expert information about the fisheries themselves, may be referred by 

 this Tribunal to a Commission of expert specialists; one to be designated by each 

 of the Parties hereto and the third, who shall not be a national of either Party, 

 to be designated by the Tribunal." 



The Tribunal now therefore calls upon the Parties to designate within one month 

 their national Commissioners for the expert examination of the questions sub- 

 mitted. 



As the third non-national Commissioner this Tribunal designates Doctor P. P. C. 

 Hoek, Scientific Adviser for the fisheries of the Netheriands and if any necessity 

 arises therefore a substitute may be appointed by the President of this Tribunal. 



