AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 1817 



man who was put in charge of her, while in the course of his passage 

 from Shelburne to St. John, according to the instructions of Captain 

 Arabin, stopped some other vessels which were fishing, and, I think, 

 brought one or two of them into St. John. The Charles was then put 

 in the admiralty court and condemned ; but when the British Govern- 

 ment learned what had been done, inasmuch as Captain Arabin had ex- 

 ceeded his instructions by using the vessel as a cruiser while en route 

 from Shelburne to St. John, before her condemnation, not only gave her 

 up, but also paid the costs of the prosecution, and the other two vessels 

 which had been so taken whether they were liable to condemnation or 

 not I do not know were also given up. This was the treatment which 

 American fishermen received at the hands of the British Government. 



Again, at Grand Manan, two vessels were taken by cruisers in 1&31 

 or 1852 I think they were called the Reindeer and Ruby or before 

 that, because the account of this affair is found in the Sessional Papers 

 of 1851 and 1852. They were actually taken in one of the inner harbors 

 of Grand Manan ; a prize crew was put on board, and they were sent to 

 St. Andrews ; but on their way up, as these two schooners passed East- 

 port, as they necessarily had to do, an armed force came out from East- 

 port, headed by a captain of militia, overpowered the crew, and took 

 possession of them. Correspondence ensued on this subject to which 

 I call your attention between the British Ambassador and the Ameri- 

 can Secretary of State, in which it was pointed out by the former that 

 this outrage had been committed on the British flag ; but through the 

 whole of this correspondence I cannot find any apology was ever made, 

 or that the British Ambassador's remonstrances on that subject were 

 even answered. 



I only see, in looking over the correspondence also as given in the 

 American Sessional Papers that a demand by the British Government 

 'for reparation was made; they did not demand the punishment of these 

 men or even the restoration of the vessel ; but simply demanded some 

 acknowledgment for the outrage which had been committed on the 

 British flag ; and yet that was never made. 



This conduct, I think, may be contrasted pretty fairly with the treat- 

 ment which the Americans received at the hands of Great Britain, when 

 Great Britain could have enforced the laws against them. The official 

 list of the vessels that were seized was put in evidence, I think. I now 

 call your attention to it; you will find in looking over it that in every 

 instance where condemnation took place there was no doubt that a 

 breach of the law by American fishermen had been committed, 

 is one matter in this connection to which I desire to call your attention ; 

 it is to be found in the official correspondence, No. 17, and it throws 

 some little light, I think, upon the extraordinary charges which Mr. Dana, 

 I consider, has somewhat too hastily made. It is No. 17 of the olll 

 correspondence put in; it is a return of American vessel* detained 

 prosecuted in the registered court of vice-admiralty at Charlottetowu 



