New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1907-05-08
FISHERY CASE DECISION
NEWFOUNDLAND UPHELD
Treaty of 1918 and Modus Viuendi
of 1906 Not TnU0IUed.

st. Johns, y. F. May THE Supreme Court
of Newfoundland to-day gave a majority de-
cision upholding the colonial government In its
contentious respecting the so-called Bay of ISL
ands herring fisheries case, in which the right
of Newfoundland fishermen TO be employed by
American vessel owners within the three-rnilo
limit involved. Sir James Winter. counsel
for the colonial fishermen concerned in the case
Informed the court after the decision had been
given that he intended to make appeal to the
Privy Council of Great Britain.
The court decided that the treaty of 1918 and
the modus vivendi of 1906 between the United
States and Great Britain had no bearing on the
issue although sections of both agreements were
considered in the arguments.
The hearing of the case. which Is one of the
most involved ever considered by the court has
OCCUPIED period of more than two months. In
connection with the proceedings counsel for
both sides went to Boston and Gloucester. Mass.
last winter and took the dispositions of men
identified with American fishing interests.
The case was a test one. Under the treaty Of
1878 American fishing vessels are allowed privi-
leges on the west coast Of Newfoundland at
points where there Inhabitants. The
village of Bay of Islands. which built up by
the American fisheries. has been fishing centre
Tor Americans for many years. The Gloucester
vessel owners by purchase of the frozen her.
ring from Newfoundland fishermen have been
able 10 lay down the fish in the United States
free or duty, if the fish had been taken by the
crews Of the American vessels. Under the en-
forcement of the colonial bait act last year the
Americans were prohibited from engaging New
foundlanders within the three-n1ile limit unless
the colonial fishermen held a license To cir
cumvent these regulations the Americans en-
gagged colonial fishermen outside the three-rnile
limit but afterward continued them in their en-
rloynaent within the limit The Americans held
that they had a perfect right TO do this under
the terms Of the modus vivendi arranged last
year between the American and British govern
naents. The modus vivendi severely criti-
cised by the Newfoundland authorities. and the
whole fisheries question was referred to the
Colonial Office at London by the Legislature
and Premier Bond six weeks ago.
In carrying out the bait act the colonial gov
eminent last year arrested two Newfoundland
fishermen, named Crane and Dubois. on the
charge of violating the law in putting herring
aboard the Gloucester. Mass, fishing schooner
Ralph l. Hall. In the local court they were con-
Victed and sentenced to pay fine OF $500 each
or spend three months in Jail
When the appealed to the Supreme
Court the Newfoundland government maintained
that the men had been properly convicted on
the ground that the bait act forbids any British
subject TO put fish aboard ca any foreign Vessei
within the three-mile limit unless he has OBJ
tanned license from the colonial government
The appellants replied that they did not need
license because fishery servants of Americans
are entitled to be thus employed under the
treaty of 1918, and under the modus vivendi the
appellants held that this treaty right was equiv
alent TO a license.
In its decision the court held that the men
were rightly convicted and are bound by local
laws. The court held that the treaty of 1918
and the modus vivendi not involved. as the
appellants are not American fishermen and en-
Joy no exemption from colonial laws under these
arrangements.
The Newfoundland government regards the
decision a great victory, but its final effect
on the American frozen herring industry will
not be determined until the points involved are
passed upon by the highest court OF Great