[Inclosure in No. 928.]
Mr. White to Lord
Salisbury.
Legation of the United States,
London
,
February 20,
1889.
My Lord: With reference to Mr. Bayard’s notes
of June 22, 1888, to Mr. Edwardes, Her Majesty’s chargé d’affaires at
Washington, and of November 23 last, to Mr. Herbert, at that time chargé
d’affaires of Great Britain in the United States, I have the honor to
acquaint your lordship that I am instructed to bring to the attention of
Her Majesty’s Government the case of the American ship Bridgewater, wrongfully seized at Shelburne, Nova Scotia, on
the 27th July, 1887, and for eighty-one days held by the Canadian
Government.
The circumstances of the case are so fully set forth in Mr. Bayard’s note
to Mr. Edwardes above referred to, that it is unnecessary for me to
repeat them. The Bridge-water was released
unconditionally on the 15th of October, 1887, but not until after the
acting commissioner of customs had endeavored unsuccessfully to release
her subject to the “condition that she takes a clearance to a foreign
port and leaves the country on the completion of the repairs, after
first paying all expenses incurred in connection with the seizure, and
after you (the owner’s agent) have formally withdrawn the protests made
and given a written abandonment of all claims upon the Government or
seizing officer on account of seizure.”
On the 24th of November last the Secretary of State was informed in reply
to his second note to Her Majesty’s legation at Washington on the
subject of the Bridgewater that her owner,
“before presenting the claim, commenced an action at law, which is still
pending, and that the Canadian Government is unable to express an
opinion on the claim until the settlement of the case in the law
courts.”
It is true that the owner of the Bridgewater, Mrs.
Allen, instituted a suit in the Canadian courts to secure damages for
her wrongful seizure and detention, but on the 24th of May, 1888, her
agent was informed by the Canadian minister of customs, to whom he had
addressed, on the 15th of that month, a claim amounting to over $20,000
for damages by reason of the wrongful seizure and detention of the Bridgewater, that the minister of justice had
decided that the claimant “could not recover against any officer of the
Crown for damages sustained in consequence of the seizure and my
Government is furthermore informed that the owner’s agent also
endeavored to obtain permission to bring a suit in the exchequer court,
but that his application was not entertained.
[Page 447]
I inclose herewith a copy of the aforesaid claim for damages with the
accompanying documents, addressed by Mr. J. H. Allen to the minister of
customs, and a copy of the latter’s reply, previously referred to.
Acting upon this declaration of the minister of justice, Mr. Allen
directed his attorneys to discontinue the suit so begun in the Canadian
courts, and the owner decided, after failure to obtain a remedy against
the Government of Canada in the exchequer court, and in view of the
official opinion that no recovery could be had in any court against any
officer of the Crown, to invoke the intervention of her own
Government.
She thereupon presented a petition to the Secretary of State, of which I
inclose a copy. The sworn statement therein referred to, of the losses
Mrs. Allen has sustained and of the amount at which she assesses the
damages, will be found in inclosure No. 1.
I also inclose copies of a letter on the subject addressed by Mr. J. H.
Allen on the 19th ultimo to the Secretary of State of the various
protests, and of a statement of the case forwarded by the United States
consular agent at Shelburne to the consul-general at Halifax.
Mrs. Allen’s petition is dated June 1, 1888, more than ten months
subsequent to the date of the seizure of the vessel, and nearly eight
months after her unconditional discharge; the intervening time having
been spent in fruitless endeavors to obtain redress, which it was
finally ascertained was not to be had through the Canadian law courts,
nor from that Government.
A serious injury has thus been unquestionably inflicted upon a citizen of
the United States by the authorities of the Dominion of Canada, for
which the head of their department of justice has declared that no
remedy is afforded by their laws.
To obviate such an evident failure of justice appeal is now made by the
Government of the injured party to the plenary power of the Government
under whose jurisdiction and official agency the injury was wrongfully
inflicted.
I am therefore instructed to bring the matter without delay to the
attention of Her Majesty’s Government, and to ask that just compensation
may be rendered to the claimant.
I have, etc.,
