Appendix to the Memorial. 159 



of July accordingly expressed the great gratification with which 

 the Department had learned the decision of the Canadian Govern- 

 ment in regard to the matter. 



I regret to say that circumstances have since been brought to 

 the attention of this Department which, while not perhaps exactly 

 in the nature of after discovered evidence, and not directly aflfecting 

 the original questions which may have been brought before the 

 trial court and passed in review by the Supreme Court of Canada, 

 were nevertheless pertinent to the settlement of the case as between 

 the two Governments and which, had they been known to the De- 

 partment, would doubtless have led to further correspondence at 

 the time and delayed, if not perhaps obstructed, the acceptance of 

 the remission of the penalty of forfeiture and the reduction of the 

 fine imposed upon the vessel to a nominal sum as a sufficient and 

 equitable settlement. 



The Department is now informed that the catch of mackerel 

 which was admittedly seined by the Frederick Gerring, Jr., out- 

 side the three-mile limit, and while engaged in the removal of which 

 from the seine the vessel drifted within the three-mile limit of a 

 barren and isolated rock called "Gull Ledge," near the southern 

 coast of Nova Scotia, where the vessel was seized by the Canadian 

 fishery cruiser, was sold by the British authorities for a consid- 

 erable sum, which does not appear to have been taken into account 

 in adjusting the reduced penalty and costs to which the vessel re- 

 mained liable after the commutation of her sentence. It further 

 appears that the seized vessel, while in the custody of the British 

 authorities, was treated in such a careless manner that her hull, 

 rigging and outfit have become so damaged as to be practically 

 worthless and their owner has found them to be of no value to him 

 whatever. 



I am not unaware that when a case of this character passes 

 from the judicial to the diplomatic resort and becomes the subject 

 of a settlement offered by the one party and accepted by the other 

 it becomes virtually barred from further treatment in that channel 

 unless exceptional circumstances, unknown to the high parties 

 reaching the agreement, should subsequently become developed. 

 I have no disposition to rc-open the case upon its original merits, 

 although I must frankly confess that this Government has never 

 felt that the Frederick Gerring, Jr., violated the treaty provi- 



