1818 



AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 



REGISTRY OF THE COURT OF VICE-ADMIRALTY, 



Charlottetoicn, October 6, 1852. 



A return of American ressels detained and prosecuted in this court for a violation of the con- 

 tention made betteeen the Goternment of Great Britain and the United States of America in 

 the year A. D. 18 J 8, and prosecuted in this court. 



'Subsequently condemned. 



WILLIAM SWABFY, Registrar. 



In addition to this return, the schooner Golden Rule, of Gloucester, U. S., was detained 

 by the Telegraph, Lieutenant Chetwynd, and brought into Charlottetown. Before she was 

 delivered over to the proper authorities, in terms of the imperial statute, Vice-Admiral Sir 

 George Seymour arrived in Her Majesty's steam-sloop Basilisk, to whom the master of the 

 Golden Rule appealed, stating he was part owner of the schooner, and would be ruined if 

 she was condemned. The admiral, on the 23d August, left authority with the lieutenant- 

 governor to direct Lieutenant Chetwynd to liberate the schooner, provided the captain ac- 

 knowledged the violation of the convention, and that his liberation was an act of clemency 

 on the part of the commander- in-chief. Bartlett, the captain of the Golden Rule, left such 

 an acknowledgment in writing, which was forwarded to Sir George Seymour, along with 

 an addition on a question from the lieutenant-governor, that he had stood inshore to fish, 

 mistaking the Telegraph tenuerforone of his countrymen's schooners. 



A. BANNERMAN, 

 Lieutenant- Governor. 



PRISCE EDWARD ISLAND, October 11, 1852. 



Here is the case of a man caught in the very act, bat who made his 

 appeal ad misericordiam, and was permitted to have his schooner back 

 again simply because he said he would otherwise have been ruined. 

 This is the treatment which American vessels have received at the 

 hands of British ofticers. The treatment which British officers received 

 in return is to be found recorded in the speech of Mr. Dana. 



1 will now pass to the next point. Mr. Dana, on page 74, says : 



We were told that we were poisoning their fish by throwing gurry overboard, and for all 



that there were to be damages. Now, these inflammatory harangues, made by politicians, 



or published in the Dominion newspapers, or circulated by those persons who went about 



through the Dominion obtaining affidavits of witnesses, produced their effect, and the effect 



was H multitude of witnesses who swore to those things, who evidently came here to swear to 



m.and took more interest in them, and were better informed upon them, than upon any 



J important questions which were to be determined. When we came to evidence to be 



I upon the evidence of men who keep books, whose interest it was to keep books, and 



the best possible bks, men who have statistics to make up upon authority and 



ihty, men whose capital and interest and everything were invested in the trade, 



rought forward witnesses to whom all persons looking for light upon this question 



would be likely to resort 



A marked distinction is drawn, you will perceive, by Mr. Dana there, 

 ith regard to the witnesses called on behalf of Her Majesty's Govern- 

 ment, as to credibility, and those heard on behalf of the United States, 

 i refers to our witnesses in slighting terms, and says that they were 

 Might here under the influence of inflammatory harangues, and articles 

 published in Dominion newspapers, which Mr. Dana may have read, but 

 which I never had the good or bad fortune to see. He states that they 

 fere brought here under that influence, and thus did swear to things which 



