125 
~ habit of catching, curing, or canning lobsters on any part of said 
ast until about the year 1886. Their operations up to said last- 
mentioned date were confined to cod fishing. 
3. That during the period intervening between the commencement 
of the lobster-packing season of the year 1882 and the end of the year 
1886 the operations of your petitioners at said establishments were 
" more or less hampered and interfered with by the action of the French 
. fishermen and the French war-ships stationed on said coast. That during 
the year 1887, to wit in the month of August of that year, the French 
' war-ship “ Pearl” visited Port Saunders aforesaid, and without warning 
_ or intimation whatever cut the buoy-lines attached to your petitioners’ 
. _lobster-traps, and set the traps attached to said buoy-lines adrift, and 
| the said traps and buoys, and the ropes and gear attached, were 
wholly lost to your petitioners. The number of traps so set adrift 
) and lost as aforesaid was upwards of 60; said traps were not, nor 
was any of them, ever recovered by your petitioners, nor any of the 
gear attached thereto. The said traps and gear so destroyed and 
lost as aforesaid were worth and of the value of $1 each. Your 
| petitioners had no traps on said coast wherewith to replace those lost 
\ and destroyed as aforesaid, nor any material from which traps could 
_ be constructed, and they were forced to continue their said business 
there without said traps, and in consequence their catch during the 
' remainder of said season at Port Saunders was materially reduced, 
. and your petitioners thereby sustained a loss in that respect alone 
of not less than $200. During the year 1888, complaints having 
| been made by Captain Humann, chief of the French Naval Division in 
_ Newfoundland, to Captain Hamond, commanding H.M.S. “ Emerald,” 
the latter wrote your petitioner, George Shearer, a letter, under 
date of the 18th of June, 1888 (a true copy whereof is hereunto 
annexed, and also hereunto annexed is a true copy of the chart 
_ which accompanied said letter). In consequence of the said letter your 
| petitioners were obliged to take up their traps at, and in the imme- 
. diate vicinity of, Port Saunders aforesaid, and were compelled either 
_ to abandon their operations at Port Saunders altogether, or to set 
_ their traps outside of the limits defined upon said charts. The limits 
_ so defined embraced the only suitable places for setting lobster-traps 
at that place, and outside of such limits was open and exposed to the 
' sea, and in consequence your petitioners lost fully 50 per cent. of 
_ the lobster-traps which they set there through stormy weather and 
high seas. Lobsters were as abundant at Port Saunders and vicinity 
in and during the season of 1888 as they were the year previously, 
but by reason of your petitioners being compelled to abandon their 
proper and usual! fishing grounds, and being obliged to set their 
