Appendix to the Memorial. 163 



The despatch at present under review states that in the ac- 

 ceptance of the remission of the penalty of confiscation which 

 Her Majesty's Government graciously ordered, it was believed 

 that such a remedy would afford a complete and satisfactory 

 settlement of the case, but that circumstances have since been 

 brought to the attention of the State Department, which, had they 

 been known at the time, would doubtless have led to further cor- 

 respondence, and delayed, if not 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. 



Mr. Secretary Sherman seems to have misapprehended the 

 attitude of Canada in the leniency shown in this case. The con- 

 ditional release of the vessel was not ordered by Her Majesty's 

 Government, but on the contrary, when it became known to your 

 Excellency's Government that the United States Government had 

 invoked diplomatic intervention, and Her Majesty's Government 

 signified a desire to be informed as to what reply Your Excel- 

 lency's Government would wish to be returned, it was pointed out 

 that as the appeal was pending in the Supreme Court, it would 

 be advisable to await the result, thus exhausting the legal remedy 

 in Canada, which might have involved the restoration of the 

 vessel. 



When, however, tiie seizure was confirmed, Your Excellency's 

 Advisers, without any pressure from Her Majesty's Government 

 beyond the request above referred to, for an intimation of the 

 nature of the intended reply, voluntarily offered to exert Execu- 

 tive clemency, and remitted the penalty of forfeiture, substituting 

 a fine of one dollar. 



The communication then explains that this subsequent in- 

 formation is to the effect that the proceeds of the catch of the 

 vessel, which had been sold by British authorities, had not been 

 taken into account in adjusting the reduced penalty and costs. In 

 this, the Honorable ^Ir. Sherman has been wholly misinformed, 

 since Your Excellency will observe from the foregoing statement, 

 that a sum of S606.55, the proceeds of the sale of the vessel's 

 catch of fish, is deducted from the expenses incident to the con- 

 demnation and care of the vessel. 



The Minister is advised that these fish were sold as soon as 



