NOTES CONCERNING THE DEATH PENALTY EXCHANGED BETWEEN THE PORTUGUESE MINISTER AND THE SECRETARY OF STATE AT THE TIME OF SIGNATURE OF THE EXTRADITION CONVENTION BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND PORTUGAL.

PORTUGUESE LEGATION, Washington, May 7, 1908.

The undersigned Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of His Most Faithful Majesty the King of Portugal and the Algarves has the honor to inform the Secretary of State of the United States that he has been instructed by His Excellency the Minister for Foreign. Affairs of Portugal to place on record on behalf of the Portuguese government, with reference to the Extradition Treaty which the Secretary of State and the undersigned have just signed, its understanding that the government of the United States assures that the death penalty will not be enforced against criminals delivered by Portugal to the United States for any of the crimes enumerated in the said treaty, and that such assurance is, in effect, to form part of the treaty and will be so mentioned in the ratifications of the treaty.

HIS EXCELLENCY, ELIHU ROOT,

VISCONDE DE ALTE.

Secretary of State of the United States.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

Washington, May, 7, 1908.

In signing to-day with the Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of His Most Faithful Majesty the King of Portugal and of the Algarves the extradition treaty which was negotiated between the Government of the United States and that of Portugal, the undersigned Secretary of State has the honor to acknowledge and to take cognizance of the Minister's note of this day's date stating that he has been instructed by His Excellency the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Portugal to place on record, on behalf of the Portuguese government, its understanding that the government of the United States assures that the death penalty will not be enforced against criminals delivered by Portugal to the United States for any of the crimes enumerated in the said treaty, and that such assurance is, in effect, to form part of the treaty and will be so mentioned in the ratifications of the treaty.

In order to make this assurance in the most effective manner possible, it is agreed by the United States that no person charged with crime shall

be extraditable from Portugal upon whom the death penalty can be inflicted for the offense charged by the laws of the jurisdiction in which the charge is pending.

This agreement on the part of the United States will be mentioned. in the ratifications of the treaty and will in effect form part of the treaty. ELIHU ROOT.

VISCONDE DE ALTE.

Minister of Portugal.

SPECIAL AGREEMENT FOR THE SUBMISSION OF QUESTIONS RELATING TO FISHERIES ON THE NORTH ATLANTIC COAST UNDER THE GENERAL TREATY OF ARBITRATION CONCLUDED BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND GREAT BRITAIN ON THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL. 1908.

January 27, 1909.

ARTICLE I.

Whereas, by article I of the convention signed at London on the 20th day of October, 1818, between the United States and Great Britain, it was agreed as follows:

"Whereas differences have arisen respecting the liberty claimed by the United States for the inhabitants thereof, to take, dry and cure fish on certain coasts, bays, harbours and creeks of His Britannic Majesty's dominions in America, it is agreed between the high contracting parties, that the inhabitants of the said United States, shall have forever, in common with the subjects of His Britannic Majesty, the liberty to take Fish of every kind on that part of the southern coast of Newfoundland which extends from Cape Ray to the Rameau Islands, on the western and northern coast of Newfoundland, from the said Cape Ray to the Quirpon Islands on the shores of the Magdalen Islands, and also on the coasts, bays, harbours, and creeks from Mount Joly on the southern coast of Labrador, to and through the Straits of Belleisle and thence northwardly indefinitely along the coast, without prejudice however, to any of the exclusive rights of the Hudson Bay Company; and that the American fishermen shall also have 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, and of the coast of Labrador; but so soon as the

same, or any portion thereof, shall be settled, it shall not be lawful for the said fishermen to dry or cure fish at such portion so settled, without previous agreement for such purpose with the inhabitants, proprietors, or possessors of the ground. And the United States hereby renounce forever, any liberty heretofore enjoyed or claimed by the inhabitants thereof, to take, dry, or cure fish on, or within three marine miles of any of the coasts, bays, creeks, or harbours of His Britannic Majesty's dominions in America not included within the above mentioned limits; provided, however, that the American fishermen shall be admitted to enter such bays or harbours for the purpose of shelter and of repairing damages therein, of purchasing wood, and of obtaining water, and for no other purpose whatever. But they shall be under such restrictions as may be necessary to prevent their taking, drying or curing fish therein, or in any other manner whatever abusing the privileges hereby reserved to them."

And, whereas, differences have arisen as to the scope and meaning of the said article, and of the liberties therein referred to, and otherwise in respect of the rights and liberties which the inhabitants of the United States have or claim to have in the waters or on the shores therein referred to:

It is agreed that the following questions shall be submitted for decision to a tribunal of arbitration constituted as hereinafter provided: Question 1. To what extent are the following contentions or either of them justified?

It is contended on the part of Great Britain that the exercise of the liberty to take fish referred to in the said article, which the inhabitants of the United States have forever in common with the subjects of His Britannic Majesty, is subject, without the consent of the United States, to reasonable regulation by Great Britain, Canada, or Newfoundland in the form of municipal laws, ordinances, or rules, as, for example, to regulations in respect of (1) the hours, days, or seasons when fish may be taken on the treaty coasts; (2) the method, means, and implements to be used in the taking of fish or in the carrying on of fishing operations on such coasts; (3) any other matters of a similar character relating to fishing; such regulations being reasonable, as being, for instance

(a) Appropriate or necessary for the protection and preservation of such fisheries and the exercise of the rights of British subjects therein. and of the liberty which by the said article I the inhabitants of the United States have therein in common with British subjects;

(b) Desirable on grounds of public order and morals;

(c) Equitable and fair as between local fishermen and the inhabitants of the United States exercising the said treaty liberty and not so framed as to give unfairly an advantage to the former over the latter class.

It is contended on the part of the United States that the exercise of such liberty is not subject to limitations or restraints by Great Britain, Canada, or Newfoundland in the form of municipal laws, ordinances, or regulations in respect of (1) the hours, days, or seasons when the inhabitants of the United States may take fish on the treaty coasts, or (2) the method, means, and implements used by them in taking fish or in carrying on fishing operations on such coasts, or (3) any other limitations or restraints of similar character —

(a) Unless they are appropriate and necessary for the protection and preservation of the common rights in such fisheries and the exercise thereof; and

(b) Unless they are reasonable in themselves and fair as between local fishermen and fishermen coming from the United States, and not so framed as to give an advantage to the former over the latter class; and (c) Unless their appropriateness, necessity, reasonableness, and fairness be determined by the United States and Great Britain by common accord and the United States concurs in their enforcement.

Question 2. Have the inhabitants of the United States, while exercising the liberties referred to in said article, a right to employ as members of the fishing crews of their vessels persons not inhabitants of the United States?

Question 3. Can the exercise by the inhabitants of the United States. of the liberties referred to in the said article be subjected, without the consent of the United States, to the requirements of entry or report at custom-houses or the payment of light or harbor or other dues, or to any other similar requirement or condition or exaction?

Question 4. Under the provision of the said article that the American fishermen shall be admitted to enter certain bays or harbors for shelter, repairs, wood, or water, and for no other purpose whatever, but that they shall be under such restrictions as may be necessary to prevent their taking, drying, or curing fish therein or in any other manner whatever abusing the privileges thereby reserved to them, is it permissible to impose restrictions making the exercise of such privileges conditional upon the payment of light or harbor or other dues, or entering or reporting at custom-houses or any similar conditions?

Question 5. From where must be measured the "three marine miles of any of the coasts, bays, creeks, or harbors" referred to in the said article?

Question 6. Have the inhabitants of the United States the liberty under said article or otherwise, to take fish in the bays, harbors, 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?

Question 7. Are the inhabitants of the United States whose vessels resort to the treaty coasts for the purpose of exercising the liberties referred to in article I of the treaty of 1818 entitled to have for those vessels, when duly authorized by the United States in that behalf, the commercial privileges on the treaty coasts accorded by agreement or otherwise to United States trading vessels generally?

ARTICLE II.

Either party may call the attention of the tribunal to any legislative or executive act of the other party, specified within three months of the exchange of notes enforcing this agreement, and which is claimed to be inconsistent with the true interpretation of the treaty of 1818; and may call upon the tribunal to express in its award its opinion. upon such acts, and to point out in what respects, if any, they are inconsistent with the principles laid down in the award in reply to the preceding questions; and each party agrees to conform to such opinion.

ARTICLE III.

If any question arises in the arbitration regarding the reasonableness of any regulation or otherwise which requires an examination of the practical effect of any provisions in relation to the conditions 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, the tribunal may, in that case, refer such question to a commission of three experts specialists in such matters; 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. This commission shall examine into and report their conclusions on any question or questions so referred to it by the tribunal and such report shall be considered by the tribunal and shall, if incorporated by them in the award, be accepted as a part thereof.