240 



and surprise on the part of his government, tliat tlie opposite course has 

 been pursued by her Majesty's colonial authorities, who have proceeded 

 (the undersigned is confident without instructions from London) to cap- 

 ture and detain an American vessel on a construction of the treaty which 

 is a matter of discussion between the two governments, and while the 

 undersigned is actually awaiting a communication on the subject prom- 

 ised to his predecessor. 



" This course of conduct, it may be added, objectionable under any 

 circumstances, finds no excuse in any supposed urgency of the case. 

 The Washington was not within three times the limit admitted to be 

 prescribed in reference to the approach of American vessels to all other 

 parts of the coast, and in taking a few fish, out of the abundance which 

 exists in those seas, she certainly was inflicting no injury on the inter- 

 ests of the colonial population which required this summary and violent 

 measure of redress. 



" The undersigned trusts that the Earl of Aberdeen, on giving a re- 

 newed consideration to the case, will order the restoration of the Wash- 

 ington, if still detained, and direct the colonial authorities to abstain 

 from the further capture of the fishing vessels of the United States un- 

 der similar circumstances, till it has been decided between the two 

 governments whether the Bay of Fundy is included among ' the coasts, 

 bays, creeks, and harbors,' which American vessels are not permitted 

 to approach within three miles. 



" The undersigned requests Lord Aberdeen to accept the assurances 

 of his distinguished consideration." 



On the 6th September, 1844, Mr. Calhoun* (who had succeeded 

 Mr. Upshur as Secretary of State) called the attention of Mr. Everett 

 to the seizure of the American fishing schooner Argus, by the British 

 cutter Sylph, off the coast of Cape JBreton. From the representation 

 which accompanied the Secretary's despatch, it appears that the Argus, 

 when captured, was at a distance of "fifteen miles from any land." 

 This was the second case of seizure under the new construction of the 

 convention of 1818. Mr. Everett, in presenting the matter to Lord 

 Aberdeen, on the 9th of October of that year, stated t that "The 

 grounds assigned for the capture of this vessel are not stated with great 

 distinctness. They appear to be connected partly by the construction 

 set up by her Majesty's provincial authorities in America, that the line 

 within which vessels of the United States are forbidden to fish is to be 

 drawn from headland to headland, and not to follow the indentations of 

 the coast, and partly with the regulations established by those authori- 

 ties, in consequence of the annexation of Cape Breton to Nova Scotia." 

 That, "with respect to the former point, the undersigned deems it ui> 

 necessary, on this occasion, to add anything to the observations con- 

 tained in his note to Lord Aberdeen, of the 25th of May, on the subject 

 of limitations of the right secured to American fishing vessels by the 

 treaty of 1783 and the convention of 1818, in reply to the note of his 

 lordship of the 15th of April on the same subject. As far as the cap- 

 ture of the Argus was made under the authority of the act annexuig 



* Executive Document 100, page 128. t Executive Document 100, page 131. 



