302 



liable to ony nction, indictment, or other suit or prosecuticm, on account 

 of such seizure ; und if any action, indictment, or other suit or prosecu- 

 tion, shnll be brought to trial against any person on account of such 

 seizure, wlierein a verdict shall be given against the defendimt, the 

 plaintilf, besides the thing seized, or the value thereof, shall be entitled 

 to no more than twopence damages, nor to any costs of suit, nor sh;ill 

 the defendant in such prosecution be fined more than one f~hilhng." 

 No American citizen can speak of this infamous law with calmness. 

 Well did Mr. Forsyth* say that some ol its provisions were "violations 

 of wcll-cslablished principles of the common law of England and of 

 the principles of all just powers and all civilized nations, and seemed 

 to be expressly designed to enable her Majesty's authorities, with 

 perfect impunity, to seize and confiscate American vesscLs 'ind to em- 

 bezzle, almost indiscriminately, the property of our citizens employed 

 in the fisheries on the coasts of the British possessions." Well, too, 

 did Mr. Evereitt stigmatize it as possessing "none of the qualities of 

 the law of civilized States but its forms;" and Mr. Davis, | as being "a 

 law of a shameful character," and "evidently designed to legalize 

 marauding upon an industrious, enterprising class of men, who have no 

 means to contend with such sharp and unwarrantable weapons of war- 

 fare." 



These are strong expressions; but they were uttered by gentlemen 

 who measure their words, and are entirely true. J\ay, moie; for I 

 shall presume to add that the politicians of Nova Scotia remind us of 

 the theory of Hobbes, who maintained that the natural state of man is 

 a state of war against all; since these very loyal gentlemen are in con- 

 tinual dispute with one another, with the government of the mother 

 country, with British subjects in other colonies, and with the people of 

 the United States. In fact, these persons, in their various contests, 

 have succeeded in miking Nova Scotia the Barbary power of this hem- 

 isphere. It was contended in England, as late as the opening of the 

 present century, that the capture and sale of an English ship by Al- 

 gerines was a piratical seizure. I am d sposed to regard die proceed- 

 ings against Anieric m fishing vessels, under the authorit}'^ derived from 

 the act of 1S:J6, as open to the same objection. When, in 1S24, young 

 Howard and his associates rescued the Uuby and the Reindeirfrom 

 the possession of the captors, the British government — as we have seen — 

 made formal and repeated demands for reparation ; but it may be diffi- 

 cult to show what o h-T or greater right to interpret the convention of 

 1818 can possibly belong to a British colony than was exercised by 

 this party of American youth. If Nova Scotia may lawfully interfere 

 with, and legislate upon, a matter which is entire!}^ national, so may 

 Miissachuselts a,nd Maine. That colon}'^ is but a dependinicy of the 

 British crown; die colonial armed cutters are mere corsairs, and their 

 seizures of our proj)erty are acts of piracy. The sea-robbers hold our 

 vessels at their mercy. The act of 183(5 places them above respon- 

 sibility, and screens them from punishment. The term ^'■yrciKirivg to 



•Despatch to Mr. Stevenson, February 20, 1841. 



t LcttPi- Co 1.01(1 Ab.M(].'f'n, April '2, 1845. 



X Letter of Hon. JoLu Davis to the fishermen of Maseachus^tte, September 1, 1852. 



