AWARD OF THE TRIBUNAL 513 



Question VI 



Have the inhabitants of the United States the Hberty under the said Article or 

 otherwise, to talje fish in the bays, harbours, and creeks on that part of the southern 

 coast of Newfoundland which extends from Cape Ray to Rameau Islands, or on the 

 western and northern coasts of Newfoundland from Cape Ray to Quirpon Islands, 

 or on the Magdalen Islands ? 



In regard to this question, it is contended by the United States that the inhabitants 

 of the United States have the liberty under Art. I of the Treaty of taking fish in the 

 bays, harbours and creeks on that part of the Southern Coast of Newfoundland which 

 extends from Cape Ray to Rameau Islands or on the western and northern coasts of 

 Newfoundland from Cape Ray to Quirpon Islands and on the Magdalen Islands. It 

 is contended by Great Britain that they have no such liberty. 



Now considering that the evidence seems to show that the intention of the Parties 

 to the Treaty of 1818, as Indicated by the records of the negotiations and by the sub- 

 sequent attitude of the Governments was to admit the United States to such fishery, 

 this Tribunal is of opinion that it is incumbent on Great Britain to produce satisfactory 

 proof that the United States are not so entitled under the Treaty. 



For this purpose Great Britain points to the fact that whereas the Treaty grants 

 to American fishermen liberty to take fish "oh the coasts, bays, harbours, and creeks 

 from Mount Joly on the Southern coast of Labrador" the liberty is granted to the 

 "coast" only of Newfoundland and to the "shore" only of the Magdalen Islands; 

 and argues that evidence can be found in the correspondence submitted indicating 

 an intention to exclude Americans from Newfoundland bays on the Treaty Coast, 

 and that no value would have been attached at that time by the United States Govern- 

 ment to the liberty of fishing in such bays because there was no cod fishery there as 

 there was in the bays of Labrador. 



But the Tribunal is unable to agree with this contention: 



(a) Because the words "part of the southern coast . . from . to" and 



the words "Western and Northern Coast . . . from . . . to," clearly indicate 

 one uninterrupted coast-line; and there is no reason to read into the words "coasts" 

 a contradistinction to bays, in order to exclude bays. On the contrary, as already 

 held in the answer to Question V, the words "liberty, forever, to dry and cure fish in 

 any of the unsettled bays, harbours and creeks of the Southern part of the Coast of 

 Newfoundland hereabove described," indicate that in the meaning of the Treaty, as 

 in all the preceding treaties relating to the same territories, the words coast, coasts, 

 harbours, bays, etc., are used, without attaching to the word "coast" the specific mean- 

 ing of excluding bays. Thus in the provision of the Treaty of 1783 giving liberty "to 

 take fish on such part of the coast of Newfoundland as British fishermen shall use"; 

 the word "coast" necessarily includes bays, because if the intention had been to pro- 

 hibit the entering of the bays for fishing the following words "but not to dry or cure 

 the same on that island, " would have no meaning. The contention that in the Treaty 

 of 1783 the word "bays" is inserted lest otherwise Great Britain would have had the 

 right to exclude the Americans to the three mile line, is inadmissible, because in that 

 Treaty that line is not mentioned; 



(J) Because the correspondence between Mr. Adams and Lord Bathurst also shows 

 that during the negotiations for the Treaty the United States demanded the former 

 rights enjoyed under the Treaty of 1783, and that Lord Bathurst in the letter of 30th 

 October 1815 made no objection to granting those "former rights" "placed under some 



