DESPATCHES, REPORTS, CORRESPONDENCE, ETC. 731 



diately attended to by our Government to the satisfaction of that of 

 Great Britain (Ex. Doc. 100, Thirty-sixth Congress, first session, 

 pp. 56 and 58). 



In 1838-'39 there were a few more seizures, but none of them appear 

 to have raised the bay or headlands question. One was seized at 

 the Gut of Canso but released; and none of these seizures appear 

 to have involved any commercial or trade question excepting the 

 Shetland, which, being driven inshore by a storm, anchored, and the 

 master was enticed into selling a boy who came on board, a pair 

 of trousers and a little tea and tobacco, for which the vessel 

 438 was immediately seized, it being evident that the boy had been 

 sent by the authorities to entrap the master (Ex. Doc. 100. 

 Thirty-sixth Congress, first session, pp. 65 and 66) ; and excepting 

 the Magnolia which purchased a barrel of herring for bait; and ex- 

 cepting the Hart, which, running into Tusket Harbour in heavy 

 weather, and while the master was on shore procuring wood and 

 water, a British subject asked some of the crew to helj) him clear his 

 nets. Some of the crew accordingly went on board the British vesse^ 

 and assisted in clearing the nets, for which the British owner gave 

 tAvo barrels of fresh herring and excepting the Eliza, which, being 

 at anchor in a gale, carried away one of her larboard chains, and ran 

 into Be vet Harbour, and got it repaired by a British subject, and was 

 accordingly seized. 



These instances are specially referred to to show that the bay and 

 headlands question almost never practically arose, and that the 

 offenses, if offenses they were, of the seized vessels, were of the most 

 trivial and unimportant character, scarcely worthy the notice of a 

 Government. 



In 1818 (and before the treaty of that year) Congress passed an 

 Act closing our ports against British vessels coming from colonial 

 ports which were closed against vessels owned by citizens of the 

 United States (Stats., vol. iii, p. 432) ; and in 1820 Congress passed 

 a supplementary Act upon the same subject and upon the same 

 principle of mutuality, applied particularly to British North Ameri- 

 can ports and certain West Indian ones (Stats., vol. iii, p. 602) ; and 

 in 1823 Congress passed an Act suspending the former Acts so far 

 as they applied to sundry ports named the Canadian ones being St. 

 John and St. Andrew's New Brunswick; Halifax, Nova Scotia: 

 Quebec, Canada ; and St. John's, Newfoundland. 



But this Act was passed with the condition that the enumerated 

 British colonial ports should be open for the admission of the vessels 

 of the United States, and provided that, if trade and intercourse 

 should be interrupted by the British authority in those ports, similar 

 action should be taken by the President in respect of our own. 



The Act of Congress of May 29, 1830, provided for opening of all 

 American ports to certain British colonial vessels on a mutual open- 

 ing of British colonial ports to American vessels. Section 2 of that 

 Act declared that 



Whenever the ports of the United States shall have been opened, under the 

 authority given in the first section of this Act, British vessels and their 

 cargoes shall be admitted to an entry in the ports of the United States from 

 the islands, provinces, or colonies of Great Britain, on or near the North 

 American continent, and north or east of the United States (Stats., v. Iv, 

 p. 420). 



