unjustly supposed to be a part, such system is one which the civilised world execrates.

But seizures of the character of that which I now present to you have no such features. They are made in waters not only conquered and owned by American fishermen, but for the very purpose for which they were being used by Captain Forbes, guaranteed to them by two successive treaties between the United States and Great Britain. These fishermen also, I may be permitted to remind you, were engaged in no nefarious trade. They pursue one of the most useful and meritorious of industries; they gather from the seas, without detriment to others, a food which is nutritious and cheap for the use of an immense population; they belong to a stock of men which contributed, before the revolution, most essentially to British victories on the North-Eastern Atlantic; and it may not be out of place to say they have shown since that revolution, when serving in the navy of the United States, that they have lost none of their ancient valour, hardihood and devotion to their flag.

The indemnity which the United States has claimed, and which Great Britain has conceded, for the visitation and search of isolated merchantmen seized on remote African seas on unfounded suspicion of being slavers, it cannot do otherwise now than claim, with a gravity which the importance of the case demands, for its fishermen seized on waters in which they have as much right to traverse for shelter as have vessels by which they are molested. This shelter, it is important to observe, they will, as a class, be debarred from if annoyances such as I now submit to you are permitted to be inflicted on them by minor officials of the British provinces.

Fishermen, as you are aware, have been considered, from the usefulness of their occupation, from their simplicity, from the perils to which they are exposed, and from the small quantity of provisions and protective implements they are able to carry with them, the wards of civilised nations, and it is one of the peculiar glories of Great Britain that she has taken the position, a position now generally accepted, that even in time of war, they are not to be the subjects of capture by hostile cruisers. Yet in defence [sic] of this immunity, thus generously awarded by humanity and the laws. of nations, the very shelter which they own in these seas, and which is ratified to them by two successive treaties, is to be denied to them, not, I am confident, by the act of the wise, humane and magnanimous Government you represent, but by deputies of deputies permitted to pursue, not uninfluenced by local rivalry, these methods of annoyance in fishing waters which our fishermen have as much right to visit on lawful errands as those officials have themselves. For let it be remembered that by annoyarices and expulsions such as these, the door of shelter is shut to American fishermen as a class.

If a single refusal of that shelter such as the present be sustained, it is a refusal of shelter to all fishermen pursuing their tasks on those inhospitable coasts. Fishermen have not funds enough, or outfit enough, nor I may add, recklessness enough, to put into harbours where, perfect as is their title, they meet with such treatment as that suffered by Captain Forbes.

351

To sanction such treatment, therefore, is to sanction the refusal to the United States fishermen as a body of that shelter

to which they are entitled by ancient right, by the law of nations, and by solemn treaty. Nor is this all. That treaty is part of a system of mutual concessions, as was stated by a most eminent English judge in the case of Sutton v. Sutton (1 Nyl v. r. 675), which I have already noticed, it was the principle of the Treaty of Peace and of the treaties which followed between Great Britain and the United States, that the "subjects of the two parts of the divided empire should be, notwithstanding the separation, protected in the mutual enjoyment" of the rights these treaties affirmed. If, as I cannot permit myself to believe, Great Britain should refuse to citizens of the United States the enjoyment of the plainest and most undeniable of these rights, the consequences would be so serious that they cannot be contemplated by this Government but with the gravest concern.

I have, &c.,

(Sd.)

The Honourable Sir L. WEST, K. C. M. G.,

T. F. BAYARD.

&c., &c., &c.

No. 217.-1886, October 20th: Letter from Mr. Bayard (United States Secretary of State) to Sir L. S. S. West (British Minister).

WASHINGTON, 20th October, 1886.

SIR,-Permit me to ask you to draw the attention of your Government to the case set forth in the enclosed affidavit of Murdoch Kemp, master of the American fishing vessel "Pearl Nelson," of Provincetown, Mass., which has been subjected to treatment by the Customs officials at Arichat, Nova Scotia, inconsistent with the international law of ordinary amity and hospitality, and also plainly violative of treaty rights under the Convention of 1818, between Great Britain and the United States.

The vessel in question was compelled by stress of weather to seek shelter in the harbour of Arichat, N. S., and arrived late at night when the Custom House was closed. Before the Custom House was opened the next day the captain went there, and after waiting over an hour, the Collector arrived and the usual inward report was made and permission asked to land the clothing of a sailor lost overboard, whose family resided in that vicinity.

He was then informed that his vessel was seized for allowing his crew to go ashore the night before, before reporting at the Custom House.

The cruel irony of this was apparent when the Collector knew such report was impossible and that the landing of the crew was usual and customary, and that no charge of smuggling had been suggested or was possible under the circumstances.

To compel the payment of a fine or a deposit of $200, which is practically the same in its results, was harsh and unwarranted and was adding a price and a penalty to the privilege of shelter guaranteed to American fishermen by treaty.

This vessel was a fishing vessel and although seeking to exercise no commercial privileges was compelled to pay commercial fees, such

as are applicable to trading vessels; but at the same time was not allowed commercial privileges.

I beg you will lose no time in representing the wrong inflicted upon an unoffending citizen of the United States, and procure the adoption of such orders as will restore the money so compelled to be deposited.

I am, &c.,

The Honourable Sir L. West, K. C. M. G.,

(Sd)

T. F. BAYARD.

&c., &c., &c.

No. 218.-1886, October 28: Report of a Committee of the Privy Council for Canada.

The Committee of the Privy Council have had their attention called by a cablegram from the Right Honourable Mr. Stanhope, as to when he may expect answer to Despatch No. 195 " Rattler."

The Honourable Mr. Bowell, for the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, to whom the papers were referred, submits for the information of his Excellency in Council that having considered the statements, copies of which are annexed, of Captain Quigley of the Government cutter "Terror" and of the Collector of Customs at Shelburne with reference to the subject matter of the despatch, he is of opinion that these officers only performed their respective duties in the case of the "Rattler," and that no just ground exists for the complaint put forward by Mr. Bayard's despatch of a "violation of that hospitality which all civilised nations prescribe," or of a "gross infraction of Treaty stipulations."

352

The Minister states that it does not appear at all certain from the statements submitted that this vessel put into Shelburne for a harbour in consequence of stress of weather. It does, however, appear that immediately upon the "Rattler" coming into port, Captain Quigley sent his chief officer to inform the Captain of the "Rattler" that before sailing he must report his vessel at the Custom House, and left on board the "Rattler" a guard of two men to see that no supplies were landed or taken on board or men allowed to leave the vessel during her stay in Shelburne Harbour. That at midnight the guard fired a shot as signal to the cruiser, and the first officer at once again proceeded to the "Rattler," and found the sails being hoisted and the anchor weighed preparatory to leaving port. The Captain being informed he must comply with the Customs regulations and report his vessel, he headed her up the harbour. That on the way up she became becalmed when the first officer of the "Terror took the Captain of the "Rattler " in his boat and rowed him to the town, when the Collector of Customs received his report at the unusual hour of 6 a. m. rather than detain him, and the Captain with his vessel proceeded to sea.

The Minister observes that under section 25 of the Customs Act every vessel entering a port in Canada is required to immediately report at the Customs, and the strict enforcement of this regulation as regards United States' fishing vessels, has become a necessity, in view of the illegal trade transactions carried on by United States'

fishing vessels when entering Canadian ports under pretext of their Treaty privileges.

That under these circumstances a compliance with the Customs Act, involving only the report of a vessel, cannot be held to be a hardship or an unfriendly proceeding.

The Minister, in view of the repeated groundless complaints of being harshly treated that have been made during the present season by the Captains of United States' fishing vessels, and in almost every instance traceable to a refusal or neglect to observe the Customs regulations which it is proper to state are enforced upon other vessels as well as those of the United States, submits herewith, a letter written by Captain Blake of the United States' fishing schooner "Andrew Burnham," which appear in the Boston (Mass.) Herald, of the 7th instant, and also the editorial comment thereon, made in a subsequent issue of the paper referred to.

The Minister believes that the statements made by Captain Blake are strictly accurate, and as applied to other vessels are substantiated by the weekly boarding reports received by the Fisheries Department from the different Captains engaged in the Fisheries Protection Service. He, the Minister, therefore, respectfully submits that the reflection of Mr. Secretary Bayard characterising the treatment extended to the Captain of the "Rattler" as unwarrantable and unfriendly is not merited in view of the facts as stated by Captain Quigley and Collector Atwood.

The Committee concur in the report of the Acting Minister of Marine and Fisheries, and advise that your Excellency be moved to transmit a copy of this Minute, if approved, to the Right Honourable Her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for the Colonies. All which is respectfully submitted for your Excellency's approval. JOHN J. MCGEE, Clerk, Privy Council, Canada.

(Sd.)

No. 219.-1886, November 6: Letter from Mr. Bayard to Mr. Phelps. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, November 6, 1886.

SIR: On October 7, 1886, the United States' fishing vessel, the Marion Grimes, of Gloucester, Mass., Alexander Landry, a citizen of the United States, being her captain, arrived shortly before midnight, under stress of weather, at the outer harbor of Shelburne, Nova Scotia. The night was stormy, with a strong head-wind against her, and her sole object was temporary shelter. She remained at the spot where she anchored, which was about seven miles from the port of Shelburne, no one leaving her until 6 o'clock the next morning, when she hoisted sail in order to put to sea. had scarcely started, however, before she was arrested and boarded by a boat's crew from the Canadian cruiser Terror. Captain Landry was compelled to proceed to Shelburne, about seven miles distant to report to the collector. When the report was made Captain Landry was informed that he was fined $400 for not reporting on the

• Document No. 214.

Document No. 215.

353

previous night. He answered that the custom-house was not open during the time that he was in the outer harbor. He further insisted that it was obvious from the storm that caused him to take shelter in that harbor, from the shortness of his stay, and from the circumstances that his equipments were exclusively for deep-sea fishing, and that he had made no effort whatever to approach the shore, that his object was exclusively to find shelter. The fine, however, being imposed principally through the urgency of Captain Quigley, commanding the Terror, Captain Landry was informed that he was to be detained at the port of Shelburne until a deposit to meet the fine was made. He consulted Mr. White, the United States' Consular Agent at Shelburne, who at once telegraphed the facts to Mr. Phelan, United States' Consul-General at Halifax, it being of great importance to Captain Landry, and to those interested in his venture, that he should proceed on his voyage at once. Mr. Phelan then telegraphed to the Assistant Commissioner of Customs at Ottawa that it was impossible for Captain Landry to have reported while he was in the outer harbor on the 8th instant, and asking that the deposit required to release the vessel be reduced. He was told in reply that the Minister declined to reduce the deposit, but that it might be made at Halifax. Mr. Phelan at once deposited at Halifax the $400 and telegraphed to Captain Landry that he was at liberty to go to sea. On the evening of October 11th Mr. Phelan received a telegram from Captain Landry, who had already been kept four days in the port stating that "the custom-house officers and Captain Quigley "refused to let him go to sea. Mr. Phelan the next morning called on the collector at Halifax to ascertain if an order had issued to release the vessel, and was informed that the order had been given," but that the collector and captain of the cruiser refused to obey it for the reason that the captain of the seized vessel hoisted the American flag while she was in custody of Canadian officials." Mr. Phelan at once telegraphed this state of facts to the Assistant Commissioner at Ottawa, and received in reply, under date of August 12, the announcement that "collector has been instructed to release the Grimes from customs seizure. This department has nothing to do with other charges." On the same day a dispatch from the Commissioner of Customs at Ottawa was sent to the Collector of Customs at Halifax reciting the order to release the Grimes, and saying "this [the customs] department has nothing to do with other charges. It is Department of Marine."

The facts as to the flag were as follows:

On October 11, the Marion Grimes, being then under arrest by order of local officials for not immediately reporting at the customhouse, hoisted the American flag. Captain Quigley, who, representing, as appeared, not the revenue, but the marine department of the Canadian administration, was, with his "cruiser," keeping guard over the vessel, ordered the flag to be hauled down. This order was obeyed; but about an hour afterwards the flag was again hoisted, whereupon Captain Quigley boarded the vessel with an armed crew and lowered the flag himself. The vessel was finally released under orders of the Customs Department, being compelled to pay $8 costs in addition to the deposit of $400 above specified.

The seriousness of the damage inflicted on Captain Landry and those interested in his venture will be understood when it is consid