2
2. The control of the waste lands being vested in the Legislature of the Colony creates no legal objection to the Imperial Parliament passing such an Act, but it would be a strong ground for abstaining from such a course without the assent of and arrangement with the Colonial Legislature.
'We have, &c.,
(Signed)
RICHARD E. WEBSTER. EDWARD CLARKE.
The Right Hon. Sir Henry Holland, M.P.,
&c,
&c.
&c.
1
·
5241.
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
C.O.885
13 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH—NOT TO
SIB,
No. 87.
(WESTERN AUSTralla.)
LAW OFFICERS to COLONIAL OFFICE.
Royal Courts of Justice,
March 18, 1887. We were honoured with Sir Robert Herbert's letter of the 11th ultimo, stating that with reference to the letter from the Colonial Office of the 23rd of June last, and to the report of our predecessors of the 4th of August,* of which a copy was enclosed for convenience of reference, respecting the pearling grounds of Western Australia, he was directed by you to transmit to us, for our con- sideration, a copy of a despatch from the Governor of Western Australia raising further questions in connexion with the subject.
That Sir Robert Herbert was also to enclose a copy of the Act referred to in that despatch, and a map showing the configuration of the bay. That by that Act the Commissioner of Crown Lands was empowered, with the approval of the Governor of the Colony, to grant licences to any person or persons to collect pearl shells in and from the waters of Shark's Bay, within a defined area to be specified in every auch license. That the Governor had been pre- viously informed, in accordance with the opinions expressed by our predecessors, that the Government of Western Australia could not legally grant exclusive rights of pearl fishing beyond the three-mile limit; and that it was no doubt intended not to specify at present, in any licence granted under the Act, an area which would extend beyond the three-mile limit. But that the Govern- ment of Western Australia would probably wish in some cases to avail themselves as fully as possible of their rights within that limit, and that the question was therefore raised (question marked “a "in paragraph 7 of the despatch), whether the three-miles limit was determined by a line which follows the indentations of the actual shore, or, where a bay occurs, by a line drawn from headland to headland.
That the answer to Sir F. N. Broome's question marked (b), depended on that to question (a); and that it was only necessary to state that Shark's Bay was for the greater part wider than six miles across, and that as a rule the distance between any point of the coast of the bay and any point of the coast of any island in the bay was greater than six miles.
}
That the question marked (c) turned upon the construction of section 15, sub-section (c), of the Federal Council of Australasia Act, 48 & 49 Victoria, chapter 60; and that the questions to be considered appeared to be whether the territorial limits spoken of in the Act referred to the three-miles limit, or to the boundary of the Colony, the definition of which, in the Commission of the first Governor of the Colony, was cited in the letter from the Colonial Office of the 23rd of June last, and how far and by what means the Federal Council could, by enactment, regulate the pearl-shell fishery outside the three- mile limit, but within the said boundary.
That Sir Robert Herbert was to request that we would be so good as to favour you with our opinion upon the questions submitted by Sir F. N. Broome. In compliance with the request contained in Sir Robert Herbert's letter we have the honour to
Report
1. That in our opinion the three-mile limit is determined by a line following the identation of the shore, when such shore fronts the open sea, but in the case of bays or inlets having the character, by their configuration, of inland waters, the base line crosses from headland to headland at the mouth of such bay or inlet; a much wider range of exclusive dominion may be established not only by treaty, but by long acquiescence or recognition by other nations. Further, against its own subjects a State can, by its own particular laws, exercise dominion at any distance from its shores (provided the place is not within the territorial limits of any other State which objects).
A 50069.-12. 25-3/87.
• No. 73.
2