768 CORRESPONDENCE, ETC. 



Mr. Bayard to Sir L. West. 



DEPARTMENT OF STATE, 



Washington, May W, 1886. 



SIR : Although without reply to the note I had the honor to address 

 to you on the 10th instant, in relation to the Canadian fisheries and 

 the interpretation of the treaty of 1818 between the United States 

 and Great Britain as to the rights and duties of the American citizens 

 engaged in maritime trade and intercourse with the Provinces of 

 British North America, in view of the unrestrained, and, as it appears 

 to me, unwarranted, irregular, and severe action of Canadian officials 

 toward American vessels in those waters, yet I feel it to be my duty 

 to bring impressively to your attention information more recently 

 received by me from the United States consul-general at Halifax, 

 Nova Scotia, in relation to the seizure and continued detention of the 

 American schooner David J. Adams, already referred to in my pre- 

 vious note, and the apparent disposition of the local officials to use 

 the most extreme and technical reasons for interference with vessels 

 not engaged in or intended for inshore fishing on that coast. 



The report received by me yesterday evening -alleges such action in 

 relation to the vessel mentioned as renders it difficult to imagine it to 

 be that orderly proceeding and " due process of law " so well known 

 and customarily exercised in Great Britain and the United States, and 

 which dignifies the two Governments, and gives to private rights of 

 property and the liberty of the individual their essential safeguards. 



By the information thus derived it would appear that after four 

 several and distinct visitations by boats' crews from the Lansdowne, 

 in Annapolis Basin, Nova Scotia, the David J. Adams was summarily 

 taken into custody by the Canadian steamer Lansdowne and carried 

 out of the Province of Nova Scotia, across the Bay of Fundy, and into 

 the port of St. John, New Brunswick, and without explanation or 

 hearing, on the following Monday, May 10, taken back again by an 

 armed crew to Digby, in Nova Scotia. That in Digby the paper 

 alleged to be the legal precept for the capture and detention of the 

 vessel was nailed to her mast in such manner as to prevent its con- 

 tents being read, and the request of the captain of the David J. Adams 

 and of the United States consul-general to be allowed to detach the 

 writ from the mast for the purpose of learning its contents was posi- 

 tively refused by the provincial official in charge. Nor was the United 

 States consul-general able to learn from the commander of the 

 Lansdowne the nature of the complaint against the vessel, and his 

 respectful application to that effect was fruitless. 



In so extraordinary, confused, and irresponsible a condition of 

 affairs, it is not possible to ascertain with that accuracy which is need- 

 ful in matters of such grave importance the precise grounds for this 

 harsh and peremptory arrest and detention of a vessel the property 

 of citizens of a nation with whom relations of peace and amity were 

 supposed to exist. 



From the best information, however, which the United States consul- 

 general was enabled to obtain after application to the prosecuting 

 officials, he reports that the David J. Adams was seized and is now 

 held (1) for alleged violation of the treaty of 1818; (2) for alleged 



