Majesty's Commissioner and the Commissioner of the United States, as disclosed in Record No. 11 of their proceedings, am of opinion that the Hunter is entitled to be considered a River.

"As such Arbitrator or Umpire, I decide that the Hunter is a River. "Dated at Saint John, in the Province of New-Brunswick, this 8th day of April, A. D. 1858.

NO. 15.-STANLEY.

"JOHN HAMILTON GRAY.

"I, the undersigned, Arbitrator or Umpire under the Reciprocity Treaty, concluded and signed at Washington on the 5th day of June, A. D. 1854, having proceeded to and examined the Stanley, in Prince Edward Island, concerning which a difference of opinion had arisen between Her Britannic Majesty's Commissioner and the Commissioner of the United States, as disclosed in Record No. 11 of their proceedings, am of opinion that the Stanley is entitled to be considered a River.

"The Stanley is a full deep stream, having, if the expression may be used, two or three heads and several affluents, and is surrounded, from its sources to its outlet, by a succession of hills of rapid elevation and descent, converging in many different parts towards the River, and affording by their slopes, and the courses at their base, numerous feeders. Its large tributaries, the Trout and Old Mill Rivers, help to swell its volume. It is described as one of the boundaries of Lot 21 in the ancient grant of 1769, and recognized by the Legislature under the designation of Stanley River. "As such Arbitrator or Umpire, I decide the Stanley to be a River. "Dated at Saint John, in the Province of New-Brunswick, this 8th day of April, A. D. 1858.

"NO. 16.-ELLIS.

"JOHN HAMILTON GRAY.

"I, the undersigned, Arbitrator or Umpire under the Reciprocity Treaty, concluded and signed at Washington on the 5th day of June, A. D. 1854, having proceeded to and examined the Ellis, in Prince Edward Island, concerning which a difference of opinion had arisen between Her Britannic Majesty's Commissioner and the Commissioner of the United States, as disclosed in Record No. 11 of their proceedings, am of opinion that the Ellis is a River.

"In the grants of Lots 14 and 16 in 1769, it is so described. A long succession of Legislative enactments so recognizes it. Its broad, deep channel; its abundant supply of fresh water; and the extent of country it drains, leaves no question about it.

"As such Arbitrator or Umpire, I decide the Ellis to be a River. "Dated at Saint John, in the Province of New-Brunswick, this 8th day of April, A. D. 1858.

"JOHN HAMILTON GRAY.

"NO. 17.—FOXLEY.

"I, the undersigned, Arbitrator or Umpire under the Reciprocity Treaty, concluded and signed at Washington on the 5th of June, A. D. 1854, having proceeded to and examined the Foxley, in Prince Edward Island, concerning which a difference of opinion had arisen between Her Britannic

Majesty's Commissioner and the Commissioner of the United States, as disclosed in Record No. 11 of their proceedings, am of opinion that the Foxley is entitled to be considered a River..

"The Foxley is described as a River in the ancient grants in 1769. "As such Arbitrator or Umpire, I decide the Foxley to be a River. "Dated at Saint John, in the Province of New-Brunswick, this 8th day of April, A. D. 1858. "JOHN HAMILTON GRAY.

"NO. 18.-PIERRE JACQUES.

"I, the undersigned, Arbitrator or Umpire under the Reciprocity Treaty, concluded and signed at Washington on the 5th day of June, A. D. 1854, having proceeded to and examined the Pierre Jacques, in Prince Edward Island, concerning which a difference of opinion had arisen between Her Britannic Majesty's Commissioner and the Commissioner of the United States, as disclosed in Record No. 11 of their proceedings, am of opinion that the Pierre Jacques is entitled to be considered a River.

"As such Arbitrator or Umpire, I decide that the Pierre Jacques is a River.

"Dated at Saint John, in the Province of New-Brunswick, this 8th day of April, A. D. 1858.

"JOHN HAMILTON GRAY.

NO. 19.-BRAE.

"I, the undersigned, Arbitrator or Umpire under the Reciprocity Treaty, concluded and signed at Washington on the 5th day of June, A. D. 1854, having proceeded to and examined the Brae, in Prince Edward Island, concerning which a difference of opinion had arisen between Her Britannic Majesty's Commissioner and the Commissioner of the United States, as disclosed in Record No. 11 of their proceedings, am of the opinion that the Brae is not entitled to be considered a River.

"As such Arbitrator or Umpire, I decide that the Brae is not a River. "Dated at Saint John, in the Province of New-Brunswick, this 8th day of April, A. D. 1858.

"NO. 20.—PERCIVAL.

"JOHN HAMILTON' GRAY.

"I, the undersigned, Arbitrator or Umpire under the Reciprocity Treaty, concluded and signed at Washington on the 5th day of June, A. D. 1854, having proceeded to and examined the Percival, in Prince Edward Island, concerning which a difference of opinion had arisen between Her Majesty's Commissioner and the Commissioner of the United States, as disclosed in Record No. 11 of their proceedings, am of opinion that the Percival is a River.

"The Percival is spoken of by Bayfield as a River. It is so described in the grant of Lot 10, in 1769; and like the Stour and the Orwell in England, owes its waters almost entirely to the Sea.

"As such Arbitrator or Umpire, I decide the Percival to be a River. "Dated at Saint John, in the Province of New-Brunswick, this 8th day of April, A. D. 1858.

5627-30

"JOHN HAMILTON GRAY.

"NO. 21.-ENMORE.

"I, the undersigned, Arbitrator or Umpire under the Reciprocity Treaty, concluded and signed at Washington on the 5th day of June, A. D. 1854, having proceeded to and examined the Enmore, in Prince Edward Island, concerning which a difference of opinion had arisen between Her Britannic Majesty's Commissioner and the Commissioner of the United States, as disclosed in Record No. 11 of their proceedings, am of opinion that the Enmore is entitled to be considered a River.

"The Enmore was treated as a River in the grants of Lots 10 and 13, in 1769; is so recognized by Bayfield; and has a bar at its mouth, formed by the conflict of the tides and the descending stream.

"As such Arbitrator or Umpire, I decide the Enmore to be a river.

"Dated at Saint John, in the Province of New-Brunswick, this 8th day of April, A. D. 1858.

"JOHN HAMILTON GRAY,

NO. 22.-OX.

"I, the undersigned, Arbitrator or Umpire under the Reciprocity Treaty, concluded and signed at Washington on the 5th day of June, A. D. 1854, having proceeded to and examined the Ox, in Prince Edward Island, concerning which a difference of opinion had arisen between Her Britannic Majesty's Commissioner and the Commissioner of the United States, as disclosed in Record No. 11 of their proceedings, am of opinion that the Ox is not entitled to be considered a River.

"As such Arbitrator and Umpire, I decide that the Ox is not a River. "Dated at Saint John, in the Province of New-Brunswick, this 8th day of April, A. D. 1858.

"JOHN HAMILTON GRAY.

NO. 23.-HALDIMAN.

"I, the undersigned, Arbitrator or Umpire under the Reciprocity Treaty, concluded and signed at Washington on the 5th day of June, A. D. 1854, having proceeded to and examined the Haldiman, in Prince Edward Island, concerning which a difference of opinion had arisen between Her Britannic Majesty's Commissioner and the Commissioner of the United States, as disclosed in Record No. 11 of their proceedings, am of opinion that the Haldiman is entitled to be considered a River.

"The Haldiman is described as a River in the grant of Lot 15, in 1769, and is so regarded by Bayfield.

"As such Arbitrator or Umpire, I decide the Haldiman to be a River. "Dated at Saint John, in the Province of New-Brunswick, this 8th day of April, A. D. 1858.

NO. 24.-SABLE.

"JOHN HAMILTON GRAY.

"I, the undersigned, Arbitrator or Umpire under the Reciprocity Treaty, concluded and signed at Washington on the 5th day of June, A. D. 1854, having proceeded to and examined the Sable, in Prince Edward Island, concerning which a difference of opinion had arisen between Her Britannic Majesty's Commissioner and the Commissioner of the United States, as

disclosed in Record No. 11 of their proceedings, am of opinion that the Sable is not entitled to be considered a River.

"Dated at Saint John, in the Province of New-Brunswick, this 8th day of April, A. D. 1858.

"JOHN HAMILTON GRAY.

"PART SECOND.

"I now come to the second division, namely:-the Miramichi and the Buctouche, being admitted to be Rivers, which of the lines pointed out by the Commissioners shall respectively designate the mouths of those Rivers?

"THE MIRAMICHI.

“I, the undersigned, Arbitrator or Umpire under the Reciprocity Treaty, concluded and signed at Washington on the 5th day of June, A. D. 1854, having proceeded to and examined the mouth of the Miramichi, in the Province of New Brunswick, concerning which a difference of opinion had arisen between her Britannic Majesty's Commissioner and the Commissioner of the United States, as disclosed in Record No. 2 of their proceedings, declare as follows:

With reference to the Miramichi, it will be seen by Record No. 2-Her Majesty's Commissioner claims, that a line connecting Fox and Portage Islands, (marked in red, Plan No. 2, Record Book No. 2,) designates the mouth of the Miramichi River. The United States Commissioner claims, that a line from Spit Point to Moody Point, (marked in blue, Plan No. 2, Record Book No. 2,) designates the mouth of said River.

"By the Treaty it is provided, that—the above mentioned liberty applies solely to the Sea Fishery; and that the Salmon and Shad Fisheries, and all Fisheries in Rivers, and mouths of Rivers, are reserved exclusively,' &c., &c.

"The preceding portion of Article 1st, gives the right to fish 'on the sea coasts and shores, and in the bays, harbours and creeks.'

"The Inner Bay of the Miramichi, and the Harbour of Buctouche, are, among other grounds, claimed as coming within the definition of 'Bays and Harbours,' and it has been urged, that the clause just referred to, is conclusive in favor of that claim, whether such bay or harbour does or does not constitute the mouth of a River.

"It is therefore necessary, before deciding which of the lines above designated as the mouth of the Miramichi, is the correct one, to dispose of this preliminary question, namely:-Does the mouth of a River forfeit its exclusive character, under this Treaty, because it may constitute a bay, or harbour? Is the restriction imposed, limited to particular fish, or locality? The spirit with which this Treaty was made, and the object it has in view, demand for it the most liberal construction; but, consistently with the most liberal construction, there are many wise and judicious reasons why the exception should be made. The joint, or common, Fishery in those places where the forbidden fish resort, would be a prolific cause of dispute. The very fact, that after the forbidden fish are named, there should follow the significant expression that all fisheries in those places, should be reserved, is conclusive as to the idea predominant in the minds

of the framers of the Treaty. They wanted peace; they would not put the Fishermen of the two nations together, on the same ground, where they would have unequal rights. Considerations of a national, administrative, or fiscal character, may have determined them to exclude the entrances of the great thoroughfares into the respective countries, from a common possession. There are large and magnificent bays and harbours, unconnected with Rivers; there are bays and harbours dependent upon and formed by mouths of Rivers. The terms are not indicative of locality. Bays and harbours may be found far up in the interior of a country; in lakes or in rivers, and on, the sea-board. The 'mouths of Rivers' are found only in one locality, namely, in that part of the River by which its waters are discharged into the sea or ocean, or into a lake, and that part of the River is by the express language of this Treaty excluded. Is the use of a term which may be applicable to many places, to eupersede that which can only be applied to a particular place, when the latter is pointedly, eo nomine, excluded? But why should such a construction be required, when the object of the Treaty can be obtained without it. The cause of the difficulty was not the refusal to permit a common fishery within the mouths of Rivers, but within three marine miles of the sea coast. That difficulty is entirely removed, by the liberty to take fish 'on the sea coast and shores, and in the bays, harbours and creeks, without being restricted to any distance from the shore.'

"The position taken by the Commissioner of the United States, is further pressed, upon the ground,-"That the terms of a grant are always to be construed most strongly against the granting party.' The application of that principle to the present case is not very perceptible. This is rather the case of two contracting parties exchanging equal advantages; and the contract must be governed by the ordinary rules of interpretation. Vattel says, 'In the interpretation of Treaties, compacts, and promises, we ought not to deviate from the common use of the language, unless we have very strong reasons for it.' And,-'When we evidently see what is the sense that agrees with the intention of the contracting parties, it is not allowable to wrest their words to a contrary meaning.' It is plain that the framers of this Treaty intended to exclude the 'mouths of Rivers' from the common possession. Onght we, by construing the terms of the Treaty most strongly against the nation where the River in dispute may happen to be, to 'wrest their words to a contrary meaning?' I think not. "Mr. Andrews, for many years the United States Consul in New Brunswick and in Canada, a gentleman whose great researches and untiring energies were materially instrumental in bringing about this Treaty, and to whom the British Colonies are much indebted for the benefits they are now deriving and may yet derive from its adoption, thus speaks of the Miramichi in his Report to his Government in 1852:-The extensive harbour of Miramichi is formed by the estuary of the beautiful River of that name, which is two hundred and twenty miles in length. At its entrance into the Gulf, this river is nine miles in width.

"There is a bar at the entrance of the Miramichi, but the River is of such great size, and pours forth such a volume of water, that the bar offers no impediment to navigation, there being sufficient depth of water on it at all times for ships of six and seven hundred tons, or even more. The