MISCELLANEOUS. 1297 



reason, beyond the poverty of the owners, the iniquitous provisions of 

 the act of 1836, and the enormous expenses which attend litigation, 

 cannot be doubted. 



The American consul at Halifax, addressing the executive of Nova 

 Scotia on the subject, observed to his Excellency, that "a claimant 

 must be in a situation to procure funds to employ lawyers, and to pay 

 heavy court expenses under the vice-admiralty table of fees; which 

 cannot be done in any of these cases, as I am informed by professional 

 men, under an advance of at least thirty or forty pounds currency: 

 adding to this the security of sixty pounds, it is evident that the owner 

 of each vessel so seized must either send on funds or letters of credit to 

 the extent of one hundred pounds, before he can oppose the seizure, or, 

 otherwise, the vessel will or may be condemned by default. 



"This sum is, perhaps, as much as any of these small vessels are 

 worth, and the claimant, if able to pay it, must actually place at haz 

 ard the one hundred pounds mentioned, in addition to his property 

 seized; and although, perhaps, quite innocent of any offence, must 

 depend upon the proverbial uncertainty of litigation for the recovery 

 of any part of the property or money in such danger." 



In a communication to. the owners of the Argus, he says : 



"The expenses in the court are very heavy, and previous to defend- 

 ing a suit, the judge requires security to the amount of three hundred 

 dollars; so that, generally speaking, it is better to let the suit go by 

 default, and purchase the vessel after condemnation." 



Lieutenant Paine, previous to his cruise in the Grampus, entertained 

 the opinion which has often been expressed during the disturbances of 

 the present year, (1852,) that "the vessels seized had been generally 

 guilty of systematic violation of the revenue laws;" but he confesses 

 that he "was soon led to suspect that this was not the cause, so much 

 as a pretence for seizing." And he states further, that "a vessel once 

 seized must be condemned, unless released as a favor; because the 

 owners will not claim her under the present laws of Nova Scotia, where 

 the only seizures have taken place. 



The consular agent of the United States for the port of Yarmouth, 

 who is a legal gentleman, and a person of great private worth, gave 

 the opinion, in the cases of the Independence and the Hart, that the 

 evidence was insufficient to authorize their seizure;" yet we have seen 

 that both were confiscated. Mr. Barnes, the naval officer of Boston,* 

 in reply to the collector of that port, who desired information in rela- 

 tion to the seizures made in 1839, states, that "while at Yarmouth I 

 had the pleasure of meeting very many highly respectable and intelli- 

 gent gentlemen of that town, who seemed deeply to regret that their 

 own government officers should have proceeded with so much rigor 

 against the American fishing craft, believing with the consul and the 

 Americans generally, that, in a majority of cases, the seizures had 

 been made for causes of the most trivial character." He adds: "It is 

 perfectly certain that our fishermen must have the right to resort to 

 the shores of the British provinces for shelter in bad weather, for fuel, 

 and for water, unmolested by British armed cruisers, or this impor- 

 tant branch of American industry must be, to a very great extent, 

 abandoned. It affords but poor consolation to the fisherman, whose 



In 1839. 

 92909 S. Doc. 870, 61-3, vol 3 43 



