148 The Frederick G erring, Jr. 



On May 25, 1896, the Frederick Gerring, Jr., cast her nets 

 off Liscombe Island, near the southern coast of Nova Scotia. The 

 seine had surrounded a school of mackerel on the high seas out- 

 side of the three-mile limit. While removing the fish from the 

 seine, — an operation which took at least two hours. — the seine and 

 the vessel drifted within the three-mile limit, and while there con- 

 tinuing the operation of removing the fish from the seine, the 

 vessel was seized by the Canadian steamship Aberdeen for unlaw- 

 fully fishing within the three-mile limit, and she was condemned 

 by the Judge of Admiralty for the Nova Scotia Admiralty District 

 and the judgment affirmed by the Supreme Court of Canada in an 

 opinion in which three of the Justices concurred, and from which 

 two of the Justices, including the Chief Justice, dissented. 



When the net was lowered it was after consultation with the 

 commander of the Vigilant and an expression of his opinion that 

 the schooner was on the high seas without the three-mile limit. 

 The Vigilant steamed away while the nets of the Gerring were in 

 the water, and the vessel was seized in the manner aforesaid after 

 she had drifted within the three-mile limit. 



I beg to call your Excellency's attention to the opinion of the 

 Admiralty Court in this case, and especially to the dissenting opin- 

 ion. From the recital of facts given by the Court, the inference 

 is conclusive that the Frederick Gerring was outside the limit when 

 she cast her net and had drifted within the limit while engaged in 

 the operation of hauling it. The Court held tliat this was a tech- 

 nical violation of the Canadian Fishing Laws and imposed the 

 penalty of forfeiture upon the vessel. The Court closes the opin- 

 ion in the following language: 



"It would, I apprehend, be difficult, if not impossible, to 

 enforce these fishery laws, to which our people attach supreme 

 importance, if those American subjects, w'ho so eagerly seel^ 

 to compete with our people along our shores in this industry? 

 who are not, I fear, always overscrupulous in the observance 

 of the laws of which they have ample notice, should be per- 

 mitted to plead accident or ignorance to a charge of infraction 

 of these laws. Such a plea, 'however effective it may be to the 

 executive authoritv of the country, cannot avail in this 

 Court." 



