p. 2532
of the Canadian survey of 1921, I am unable to agree with the general description of Lake Melville or of that of the connecting Waterway or with the consequential deductions contained in paragraph 18 of the Canadian Case.
The suggestion in that paragraph that the connecting Waterway between Lake Melville and the Sound extends seaward as far as Ticoralak and Turner headlands, 10 miles from the entrance to the Narrows is in my opinion entirely incorrect.
With regard to the contention that the term “ Coast of Labrador ” could not properly be used to designate the Labrador Peninsula or any considerable subdivision of it, it is not difficult to cite instances of large Districts and Countries within the British Empire which are generally and authoritatively described in their whole extent by names including the term “ coast ” e.g. Gold Coast, Gold Coast Colony, Malabar Coast.
Finally without any consideration to the preceding remarks and as viewed from another standpoint, there appear to me to be sufficient reasons of Imperial Policy against placing Lake Melville in the category of River Systems, instead of, as heretofore among the Sea Inlets, inasmuch as a new precedent would be thus set up which would involve a general re-classification of similar Water Basins joined to the sea and an alteration in the standards now applied to determine their nature, and further any such change might very likely serve to prejudice the position of the British Empire, as a maritime power, in any future Territorial disputes or Congresses with other Nations.
[1927lab]
|
