New-York tribune., 1905-04-24

less. because # has IN important bearing upon the
issue involved, in that it makes evident th1-
the United States has never recognized the rsbt et
colony to enact legislation affecting American
fishermen and binding upon them, "a. exclude
fishing vessels from inIets along the Coas- n lSS
again. the former question arose. when Canada
sought to impose upon them the obligation Of com-
plying with her local fishery regulations but was
met by stout refusal. indOrsed by the adninIstra
ton az Washington. and 50 curtly wOrded that the
claim has never been advanced since. while as re-
CARDS the right alleged % vest in ,be colony To
distinguish between the seacoast waters and those
OF haroors and inIets it is answered by the argu-
ment that the same rights now possessed bv the
Americans We're all held in the same way. and they
entered every harbOr on the west coast.
IL IS quite evident, from the pIeadings and argu-
ments before the Halifax Fishery Tribunal that
England sought to make distinction between the
coasts and the inlets thereon and also 70 maintain
the "headand argument that the territorial waters
should extend three miles beyond a line drawn
across the bays, from headland To headand.
the official British and 10 that extent Sir Rob
err Bond IS warranted in using il in the present dis
England. which stood sponsor for it thirty years
never agreed 10 iris doctrine having or me CON
trary upheld the counter contention that the
contention substantiated by the recent Alaskan
6oGndaTy award " herein the strip of TERRITORY
leagues inland from the head OF the Lynn Canal
DIFFICULT POLICY TO CARRY OUT
1t is clear then. that in his idea that he could
Keep the American fishermen out of the west coast
waters. where they have treaty rights. excluding
them from the harbors and forbiddng them TO set
foot the strand haul their nets, Premier Bond
was planning to adopt policy which he would find
some difficulty in carrying out, because even an
academic Geliverauce by England that our rights
go so far is very different matter from assisting
Us by moral and material support 10 enforce This
Interpretation. And that. iJ is understood she
will not attempt to do. so the colony VIII have u
Rbate its pretensiOus to within limits whlrh 30 viii
be possible for her TO maintain by the basic prnC-
Piles of international law. the rights which Jhe
Americans themselves do not deny her and which
the unnistaka Ole laDguag" or The treaty or my
guarantees her in against even Oh" most ingenious
pleas that might he advanced To minimize them or
70 argue that with The changes brought about hy
the years that have lapsed since thCn a new order
OF things should exist
In brief. then. the most important right which
will accrue TO Newfoundland under the regime
Is that Of excluding the American hSuermeu from
ell her territorial waters eastward trurc ttlIIet
Island cape Race and thence north to EeilelSle
Strait. twO-thirds Os our coast line and that pof
tiOn of t with the best bait supply and nearest u
tine Grand Banks where the cod and ha1but ushls'-
Is mainly done nowadays by FrC0chmeO. AneIl-
cans. Canadians and NewfoundlaDderS- Au '1rIeSl
OF what the enforcement of the Bait act 3g2llis-
the Americans accomplish is afforded by t1t
following official statistics Of the fisheries of -
before the Bait act passed. and 1895. the IaSl
having been then eighteen years in force