Learn about the beta

Case No. 3: The “C. H. White.”

[Page [210]] [Page 211]

CASE No. 3.
The “C. H. White.”

statement of the case.

The C. H. White was an American schooner, duly registered in accordance with the laws of the United States of America at the port of San Francisco, in the State of California, and was owned and officered by citizens of the United States.

The ownership of the said schooner was, on the 15th day of July, A. D. 1892, vested in the Eagle Fishing Company, a corporation duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of California of the United States of America.

The names and residences of the stockholders, officers, and directors of the said Eagle Fishing Company were on the said 15th day of July, 1892, as follows, to wit: Johan H. C. Prien, San Francisco, president; Charles W. Preis, San Francisco, vice-president; Charles A. Wagner, San Francisco, secretary; Louis Schmidt, San Francisco, director; Lawrence M. Furman, San Francisco, master of vessel.

The above-named stockholders, on the said 15th day of July, 1892, owned all of the capital stock of the said Eagle Fishing Company, and each of them was on the said 15th day of July, and still is, a citizen of the United States of America.

The said schooner C. H. White sailed from San Francisco, Cal., in the United States of America, on the 7th day of May, A. D. 1892, with her clearance and ship’s papers in proper and lawful form, with a full complement of officers and men, bound upon a fishing and hunting cruise in the North Pacific Ocean, or elsewhere, as the master might direct, with Lawrence M. Furman, one of the stockholders and directors of the said Eagle Fishing Company, as master; Andrew Ronning, mate; Neils Wolfgang, hunter; and a crew of 10 white men and 4 Indians, all of whom, with the exception of 1 white man, Julius Furman, and the 4 Indians, were citizens of the United States of America. And the said schooner C. H. White was at the time of her setting sail from San Francisco, and up to the time of her seizure by the Russian Government, in all respects seaworthy and fit for the voyage which it was intended she should take as herein mentioned, well and sufficiently manned, victualed, furnished, and equipped with all things necessary for a vessel in the merchant service, and particularly for the voyage she was about to undertake.

And the said Lawrence M. Furman, one of the stockholders and directors of the said Eagle Fishing Company, as aforesaid, was the duly qualified and acting master of the said vessel during the said voyage; and the said Furman was at the time when the claims herein set forth had their origin a citizen of the United States of America.

In support of these allegations the following documents are hereto [Page 212]annexed and submitted in evidence, marked, respectively, as herein stated:

  • Exhibit A.—A duly certified copy of the certificate of incorporation of the Eagle Fishing Company.
  • Exhibit B.—A duly authenticated copy of the clearance papers of the said vessel from the port of San Francisco.
  • Exhibit C.—A duly authenticated copy of the certificate of the collector of the port of San Francisco, showing the ownership of the said C. H. White.
  • Exhibit D.—A duly authenticated copy of the outward manifest of the said vessel.
  • Exhibit E.—A duly authenticated copy of the certificate of naturalization of the said Neils Wolfgang.
  • Exhibit F.—A duly authenticated copy of the certificate of naturalization of Lawrence M. Furman.

Proceeding upon their voyage on board the good schooner C. H. White, the master and crew of the said vessel caught and killed upon the high seas, namely, more than 30 miles to the southward of the Aleutian Islands, in the North Pacific Ocean, 8 barrels of mackerel, 1 ton of codfish, and 20 seals.

On the 12th day of July, A. D. 1892, the said schooner, C. H. White, was about 40 miles to the southward of Agattou Island, one of the Aleutian Islands, the crew being engaged in fishing, and on or about that day the master of the said vessel set sail for the Kurile Islands, off the coast of Japan, intending to fish there. The master of the said vessel, finding that his chronometer was out, and wishing to correct the error, deviated from his course toward the Kurile Islands, for the purpose of sighting either Copper Island or Behring Island, in order to correct his chronometer.

On the 15th day of July, 1892, the said C. H. White arrived at latitude 54° 18’ north, longitude 167° 19’ east, by correct observation, and no person upon the said vessel had either fished or hunted for or killed any seals in said place, or within 50 miles thereof, or in Russian waters at all during the said voyage.

While sailing upon its course, as aforesaid, and in said latitude 54° 18’ north, longitude 167° 19’ east, with a light wind, and no boats being out from the said vessel, but all of her company being on board of her, and no one on board of her being either hunting or fishing, the said schooner C. H. White was boarded by an officer from the Russian war cruiser Zabiaca, an armed cruiser of the Imperial Russian navy, and the master of the said C. H. White was ordered by the said officer of the said Russian war cruiser to come on board of the said cruiser and to bring with him all of his vessel’s papers. The master accordingly went on board of the said cruiser, taking with him the ship’s papers of the C. H. White, and the commanding officer of said cruiser, after examining the schooner’s papers, arrested the master, and then had all of the crew of the said C. H. White, except the mate, brought onboard of the cruiser, and the master and crew of the said C. H. White were kept on board of the said cruiser as prisoners, the master being kept under guard. The said commanding officer of the said Russian cruiser Zabiaca then and there seized the said schooner C. H. White and towed her to Nikolovsky Bay, Bering Island, and then placed the said schooner under the charge of a prize crew and sent it to Petropaulovsk; and the cruiser, with the master and crew of the said C. H. White as prisoners, sailed to Petropaulovsky, and arrived there on the 20th day of July, A. D. 1892, and the schooner C. H. White was there confiscated by the officers and agents of the [Page 213]Russian Government and appropriated to the use of the Imperial Government of Russia.

The master of the schooner C. H. White duly protested to the commanding officer of the said Russian war cruiser against the seizure of his vessel, and against all the other acts complained of; and on the 5th day of August, A. D. 1892, the said master duly lodged a protest with the governor of Petropaulovsk against the seizure of his vessel and against all the other said acts; and on the 31st day of August, A. D. 1892, the said master made a due and formal marine protest against said seizure to James G. Swan, a notary public in and for Port Townsend, State of Washington, United States of America, immediately upon his arrival at said city, said city being the first place in the United States at which he arrived after leaving Russian jurisdiction upon his release by the Imperial Russian Government.

At the time of the arrest of the said master of the schooner C. H. White he, the said master, was compelled, under duress and by threats of deportation to Siberia, to sign a paper which, being in the Russian language, an unknown tongue to the said master, he could not understand.

The said master was, upon his arrest, put in close confinement in a room in said cruiser, and there kept constantly confined under a guard of four marines until the arrival of the cruiser at Petropaulovsk, without bedclothes or any change of clothing nor any of his effects; and, owing to the conditions of his confinement, he fell sick and was refused medical attention, and owing thereto and to subsequent enforced exposure and hard treatment his health became permanently impaired.

Upon the final restitution of his effects to the said master he found that certain of his property had been abstracted therefrom, to wit: One chronometer, valued at $125; 1 aneroid barometer, valued at $7;.1 pair of marine glasses, valued at $25; 1 thermometer, valued at $1; 1 lot of charts, valued at $25; 1 lot of nautical books, valued at $15; 1 silver watch and gold chain, valued at $40; 7 razors, valued at $15; 1 coal-oil stove, valued at $3; 1 pair of rubber boots, valued at $5; 1 lot of clothing, valued at $25; 2 shotguns, valued at $96; 2 rifles, valued at $23.

Similarly, there were abstracted from the personal effects of the mate of the said vessel the following articles, to wit: Two nautical books, valued at $10; 1 pair of rubber boots, valued at $5; 1 oiled coat, valued at $5; 3 suits of clothes, valued at $9; 7 pairs of socks, valued at $3.50; 1 watch and chain, valued at $23; 1 razor, valued at $3; and 2 pocket-knives valued at $2.

Similarly, there were abstracted from the personal effects of the hunter, Neils Wolfgang, the following articles, to wit: One lot of underwear, valued at $7; 1 lot of shoes, valued at $4.50; 1 pair of trowsers, valued at $7; 1 oilskin coat, valued at $3.50; 1 lot of socks, valued at $2; 1 pair of rubber boots, valued at $5; one gold ring, valued at $9; 1 knife, valued at 75 cents; 9 seal skins, valued at $18.

The officers and men, upon arriving at Petropaulovsk, were each allowed the sum of 15 kopecks a day for their subsistence, a sum equal, at the present rate of exchange, to about 40 centimes in French money, and at that time worth far less, and having in that country so small a purchasing power that it would only buy half a loaf of bread, so that all were obliged to beg in order to obtain sufficient nourishment to sustain life.

[Page 214]

The master was obliged to seek such shelter as he could find at Petropaulovsk, and although weak and suffering from exposure and privation, he was obliged to content himself with such protection as was afforded by the hatch house of an American vessel then lying in port—an apartment 6 feet long, 6 feet wide, and 6 feet high, designed for keeping tools.

The mate and the rest of the crew, consisting of 10 white men and 4 Indians, were assigned for shelter by the officials of the Russian Government to a leaky shed 18 feet long by 10 feet wide, which they were obliged to share with 24 other persons. Thus 38 men were obliged to dispose themselves as best they might in a building the dimensions of which were insufficient to permit all of them to lie down at the same time upon the floor.

In support of these allegations the following documents are hereto annexed and submitted in evidence, marked, respectively, as follows, to wit:

  • Exhibit F.—1. A duly authenticated copy of the memorial of the Eagle Fishing Company to the Department of State of the United States of America.
  • 2. A duly authenticated copy of the deposition of L. M. Furman.
  • Exhibit H.—A duly authenticated copy of the memorial of said Lawrence M. Furman to the Department of State of the United States, setting forth his claim for damages sustained by him by reason of the seizure of the schooner C. H. White and the acts connected therewith.
  • Exhibit I.—A duly authenticated copy of the memorial of Andrew Ronning, mate of the schooner C. H. White, setting forth his claim for damages sustained by him by reason of the seizure of the said vessel and the acts connected therewith.
  • Exhibit J.—A duly authenticated copy of the memorial of Neils Wolfgang, a hunter of the schooner C. H. White, to the Department of State of the United States, setting forth his claim for damages sustained by him by reason of the seizure of the said schooner and the acts connected therewith.
  • Exhibit K.—A duly authenticated copy of the marine protest made by the said Lawrence M. Furman, master of the said schooner C. H. White, to James G. Swan, a notary public in and for Port Townsend, in the State of Washington, United States of America.
  • Exhibit L.—A copy of Chart T of the United States Coast Survey, showing the waters in which the seizure of the C. H. White took place, and on which is indicated the point of intersection of the parallel of latitude 54° 18’ north and the meridian of longitude 167° 19’ west.

presentation of claims.

The claims of the owners, officers, and crew of the C. H. White for damages sustained by them by reason of the seizure of their vessel and the acts connected therewith were duly presented to the Imperial-Government of Russia, as is shown by the note of the then envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary of the United States of America at the Imperial Court of Russia, dated December 26, 1894, a duly authenticated copy of which is hereto annexed and submitted in evidence, marked Exhibit M.

And these claims continued to be pressed by the legation of the United States at St. Petersburg and a settlement of them urged by said legation upon the Imperial Government of Russia.

On October 25, 1895, the legation of the United States at St. Petersburg received a note from the Imperial Russian ministry of foreign affairs, dated October 12, 1895, old style (October 24, 1895, new style), a duly authenticated copy of which is hereto annexed and submitted in evidence, marked Exhibit N, in which the Imperial Russian Government denied the allegations made by the claimants as to the circumstances of the seizure, and set up the claim that the schooner C. H. White was seized in latitude 50° 30’ north, longitude 167° 15’ west, and [Page 215]not, as stated by the master of the vessel, in latitude 54° 18’ north, longitude 167° 19’ west, but still, by the admission of the Imperial Russian Government, 23 miles from Russian land.

On the 27th day of January, old style (8th day of February, new style), 1899, the then chargé d’affaires of the United States at St. Petersburg, acting under instructions from the Government of the United States, addressed a note to the Imperial Russian minister of foreign affairs proposing a compromise of the claims arising out of the seizure of the said schooner, and a duly authenticated copy of the said note is hereto annexed and submitted in evidence, marked “Exhibit O.”

On the 26th day of March, 1899, the embassy of the United States at St. Petersburg received a response to the said note from the Imperial Russian minister of foreign affairs, dated March 13, old style (March 25, new style), 1899, refusing to make any compromise settlement of said claim. A duly authenticated copy of said response is hereto annexed and submitted in evidence, marked “Exhibit P.”

The following documents are also hereto annexed and submitted in evidence, marked, respectively, as follows, to wit:

  • Exhibit Q.—A sworn copy of a translation of a paragraph occurring in a printed report of the director of the hydrographic department of the Imperial Russian ministry of marine, Vice-Admirai Wewel von Kruger, for the year 1875, printed in the Russian language at St. Petersburg, in the printing office of the Imperial ministry of marine, the said paragraph being on page 91 of said pamphlet. The original of said pamphlet forms part of Exhibit CC in the case of the Cape Horn Pigeon, in arbitration together with the present claims, and this exhibit is now referred to in the present case as here stated.
  • Exhibit R.—A duly authenticated copy of a note received by the legation of the United States of America at St. Petersburg from the Imperial Russian ministry of foreign affairs, dated May 8, 1882.
  • Exhibit S.—A duly authenticated copy of a note received by the legation of the United States of America at St. Petersburg from the Imperial Russian ministry of foreign affairs, dated June 1–13, 1882, together with its inclosure, all forming one exhibit.
  • Exhibit T.—The sworn deposition of Johan H. C. Prein, president of the Eagle Fishing Company, as to the value of the C. H. White, her equipment and cargo, at the time of the seizure, and the probable catch of the vessel, as well as the loss sustained by the Eagle Fishing Company by reason of her seizure.
  • Exhibit U.—The sworn deposition of Andrew P. Lorentzen as to the value of the C. H. White and her equipment.
  • Exhibit V. —The sworn deposition of James Boyes as to the value of the C. H. White and her equipment.
  • Exhibit W.—The sworn deposition of Charles Lutjens as to the value of the probable catch of the C. H. White during the season in which the vessel was seized.
  • Exhibit X.—An authenticated copy of the certificate of registry of the C. H. White.
  • Exhibit Y.—The sworn deposition of W. H. Grodt as to the identity of L. M. Furman.
  • Exhibit Z.—An authenticated copy of the certificate of naturalization of Andrew Olsen, alias Andrew Ronning, as citizen of the United States of America.
  • Exhibit AA.—An authenticated copy of the deposition of Andrew Olsen as to his identity.
  • Exhibit BB.—An authenticated copy of the deposition of Martin Olsen to the same effect.
  • Exhibit CC.—An authenticated copy of the deposition of Theodore Lowassen to the same effect.
  • Exhibit DD.—Senate Document No. 59, Fifty-fifth Congress, second session, Bering Sea awards.

treaty obligations and the law of nations.

By the stipulations of the treaty of 1824 between the Government of the United States of America and the Imperial Government of Russia it was agreed—

That in any part of the great ocean commonly called the Pacific Ocean, or South Sea, the respective citizens or subjects of the high contracting powers shall be neither [Page 216]disturbed nor restrained, either in navigation or in fishing, or in the power of resorting to the coasts, upon points which may not already have been occupied, for the purpose of trading with the natives, saving always the restrictions and conditions determined by the following articles.

The same declaration was made in the treaty of 1825 between Russia and Great Britain, and both of these treaties were concluded as the result of the protests of the Governments of the United States and Great Britain against the claims of the Imperial Government of Russia of exclusive jurisdiction within the Bering Sea beyond the limits of ordinary territorial waters.

In the tribunal of arbitration convened at Paris under the treaty between the United States of America and Great Britain, concluded at Washington February 20, 1892, for the determination of questions between the two Governments concerning the jurisdictional rights of the United States in the waters of Bering Sea, a majority of the board of arbitration adopted the following decisions:

By the ukase of 1821 Russia claimed jurisdiction in the sea now known as the Bering Sea to the extent of 100 Italian miles from the coasts and islands belonging to her, but in the course of the negotiations which led to the conclusion of the treaties of 1824 with the United States, and of 1825 with Great Britain, Russia admitted that her jurisdiction in said sea should be restricted to the reach of cannon shot from shore, and it appears that from that time up to the cession of Alaska to the United States Russia never asserted in fact or exercised any exclusive jurisdiction in Bering Sea or any exclusive rights in the seal fisheries therein beyond the ordinary limit of territorial waters.

The body of water now known as the Bering Sea was included in the phrase “Pacific Ocean” as used in the treaty of 1825 between Great Britain and Russia.

No exclusive rights of jurisdiction in Bering Sea and no exclusive rights to seal fisheries therein were held or exercised by Russia outside of ordinary territorial waters after the treaty of 1825.

The United States has not any right of protection or property in the fur seals frequenting the islands of the United States in the Bering Sea when such seals are found outside the ordinary 3-mile limit.

(See the proceedings of the tribunal.)

It has therefore been decided by this international tribunal of arbitration, as is shown in these decisions and in its final award, that the Bering Sea is an open sea, the common highway of all nations, and that no nation can of right exercise in it jurisdiction over vessels frequenting it for purposes lawful under international law beyond such ordinary territorial waters therein as are contiguous to its coasts, and that all nations have the right to navigate the Bering Sea and to fish and take seals therein outside of such territorial waters.

It is admitted by the Russian Government that the C. H. White was more than 20 miles from Russian land when she was arrested. She was therefore upon the high seas and wholly without Russian jurisdiction.

Chancellor Kent has stated:

The open sea is not capable of being possessed as private property, the free use of the ocean for navigation and fishing is common to all mankind, and the public jurists generally and explicitly deny that the ocean can ever be appropriated.

Vatel says:

To-day the whole extent of the sea within cannon shot of shore is regarded as formng part of the territory, and hence a vessel captured under the guns of a neutral fortress is not good prize. All that we have said of parts of the sea near to the coast is to be said in particular and with greater reason of roadsteads, bays, and straits as still more susceptible of occupation and more important to the country. But I speak of bays and straits of small extent, and not of great expanses of water to which are sometimes given these names—as Hudson Bay, the Straits of Magellan—over which empire could not extend and still less ownership. (Laws of Nations, book 1, chap, xxiii, sees. 289, 291.)

[Page 217]

Phillimore says:

It is sufficient to say that the reason of the thing, the preponderance of authority, and the practice of nations have decided that the main ocean, inasmuch as it is the necessary highways of all nations and is from its nature incapable of being possessed, can not be the property of any one State. (Commentaries on International Law, third edition, Chap. V., pp. 247–248. CLXXII.)

The very eminent Russian jurist, M. F. de Martens, counsel for the Imperial Russian ministry of foreign affairs, writes as follows:

In our day legislation and jurists are in accord in recognizing the liberty of the ocean, and no people can set up the claim of governing it. To-day those portions of the sea which communicate with the ocean are recognized as free and accessible to all the world even when they are surrounded by the possessions of a single State. (Treatise on International Law, Vol. I, p. 494.)

Quoting further from the same treatise:

The ocean is free for all peoples. No nation can be interdicted from engaging in fishing and other peaceable enterprises on the high seas. If all possess there an equal right it follows that no State can there impose its laws on the others, cause judgment to be passed on foreign navigators or sailors, nor arrest nor search the vessels of another country.

Ortolan writes:

It remains to show that the sea can not be the property of any nation; and as what has been said regarding full and complete ownership is equally applicable to its functions—as, for example, the right of use, of gathering its fruits, of taking its products—it is demonstrated that no nation can possess these rights of property exclusively; that the use of the sea remains eternally open and common to all; that it is, so to speak, the patrimony of all mankind, a patrimony indivisible and which must forever remain indivisible. (Diplomacy of the Sea, vol. 1, p. 128.)

The same author remarks:

As to particular and interior seas a right of exclusive domain and sovereignty on the part of one nation over such a sea is only incontestable when that sea is totally surrounded by its territory so that it forms an integral part of it and could absolutely serve only as a means of communication and of commerce between the citizens of that nation. Then, indeed, none of the conditions which interfere either with ownership or empire of the seas are applicable. But the moment that several different States possess the shores of such sea, none of them can call itself either owner or sovereign to the exclusion of the others. (Ibid., p. 159.)

In the arbitration under the convention of February 8, 1863, between the United States and Great Britain, of the claims growing out of the seizure of the American fishing schooner Washington in the Bay of Fundy by one of Her Britannic Majesty’s cruisers, the umpire declared:

The Bay of Fundy is from 65 to 75 miles wide and from 130 to 140 miles long. It has several bays on its coast. Thus the word bay, as applied to this great body of water, has the same meaning as applied to the Bay of Biscay and the Bay of Bengal, over which no nation can have the right to assume sovereignty.

But apart from all abstract reasoning or interpretation of the phraseology of any treaty, or the application of the principles of International Law to the special case, the Russian Government has itself admitted that its jurisdiction in the Bering Sea is confined to the limits of ordinary territorial waters, and has itself defined such limits as extending to 3 miles from its coasts. This admission on the part of the Imperial Government is contained in the documents hereto annexed and marked “Exhibits Q, R, and S,” already recited.

It is claimed by the master and owners of the C. H. White that the vessel was seized by the Russian cruiser Zabiaca at a point 80 miles from the nearest Russian land, while the statement of the Russian authorities is that the seizure was made at 23 miles from Russian land, [Page 218]as is shown by the statements contained in the note of the Imperial Russian ministry of foreign affairs, dated October 12 (24), 1895, submitted in the evidence herewith and marked “Exhibit N.”

This is a question of fact in which the testimony of the officers of the respective vessels appears to differ. The claimants are unfortunately unable to produce the documentary evidence as to this fact, owing to the seizure of all the ship’s papers of the C. H. White, including the log book, by the Russian officers. But in any case, the distance of 23 miles, claimed by Russia as the point at which the seizure was made, is far without any possible marine jurisdiction of any State. Nor is the claim set up, that the C. H. White had at one time been within 11 miles of Medney Island, justification of the seizure of the vessel. This statement is wholly at variance with the sworn testimony of the master of the vessel, but whether or not the schooner was at 11 miles from Medney Island she was at all events quite without Russian jurisdiction. It is not at all admitted that the C. H. White ever was as near to Russian territory, before her seizure, as 11 miles, but it is claimed with confidence that her master would have been quite within his rights in taking her within that distance of Russian lands up to the accepted limit of marine jurisdiction, namely, a marine league from the Russian coast, and of there engaging in his lawful occupation of fishing and seal hunting.

And it is further claimed that none of the allegations set forth in the note of the Imperial Russian ministry of foreign affairs of October 12 (24), 1895, just cited, even if true, offers sufficient ground for the seizure and confiscation of a vessel of a friendly State, upon the high seas, and the imprisonment and maltreatment of her crew.

Upon Russia’s own showing the C. H. White was upon the high seas when seized, nor is any evidence adduced to show that she ever had been within Russian jurisdiction for any purpose whatsoever. The only justification of the seizure offered is the statement that the vessel’s log book had not been kept for two days; that certain entries in it are alleged to indicate that she had been cruising “in the neighborhood of the Commander Islands,” and that she bad on board apparatus for taking seals, together with 5 freshly killed seals which had not yet been skinned.

As to the allegation that the log book had not been kept up for two days, if it be true, that is a matter quite outside of Russian jurisdiction. The C. H. White was, when seized, upon the high seas wholly without Russian jurisdiction, and, sailing under the flag of the United States, her master was responsible only to the authorities of his own country for all acts or omissions of this nature.

Even if, contrary to the assertions of the master of the vessel, she had been cruising in the neighborhood of the Commander Islands, an allegation the truth of which, however, is not admitted, such an act does not constitute a depredation upon Russian territory or a trespass upon Russian territorial waters. Even within the 3-mile limit she had the right of innocent passage. In regard to this Hall writes:

In all cases in which territorial waters are so placed that a passage over them is either necessary or convenient for the navigation of the open seas, as in that of marginal waters or of an appropriated strait connecting unappropriated waters, they are subject to the right of innocent use by all mankind for the purposes of commercial navigation. The general consent of nations, which was seen to be wanting, to the alleged right of navigation of rivers may fairly be said to have been given to that of the open sea. Even the earlier and more uncompromising advocates of the right of appropriation reserved a general right of innocent navigation. For more than two [Page 219]hundred years no European territorial marine waters which could be used as a thoroughfare, or into which vessels could accidentally stray or be driven, have been closed to commercial navigation, and during the present century no such waters have been closed in any part of the civilized world. The right must therefore be considered to be established in the most complete mannt. (Hall, Treatise on International Law, fourth edition, Pt. II, Chap. II, pp. 164 and 165.)

liability of russia.

The Russian Government has attempted in the note of October 12 (24), 1895 (Exhibit N), to justify the seizure of the C. H. White on the ground of her having “probably” taken seals within Russian territorial waters. There is no evidence whatever offered by the Russian Government to support this allegation, and on the contrary the master of the schooner positively denies, under oath, that any seals were taken within Russian territorial waters.

No invasion of Russian territory or territorial waters or depredation therein or any corpus delicti has been shown by Russia, nor is there a particle of affirmative evidence to show that this vessel or anyone connected with her ever entered Russian waters for any purpose whatsoever.

The utmost that the Russian Government has been able to say in justification of the seizure is that the vessel was taken on the high seas on suspicion of having violated the municipal laws of Russia.

No judicial proceedings, so far as the parties in interest in the vessel or the Government of their country has ever been informed, were ever held to condemn or acquit the C. H. White, but she was simply confiscated and her master and crew made to suffer penal imprisonment on suspicion. No Government or its agents has the right to seize and confiscate foreign vessels and their cargoes on the high seas and imprison and maltreat their crews merely because it is believed that such vessels or their crews have violated the municipal laws of the country. If, in the exercise of belligerent rights, the vessel of an enemy State, seized by a ship of war, is entitled to trial before a duly organized prize tribunal before confiscation, much more is the vessel of a friendly State, in time of peace, entitled to such proceedings, even were the right of visit and search in time of peace admitted.

The question of visitation and search and of seizure of neutral vessels without the limits of territorial jurisdiction is thus discussed by Mr. Dana in his note, No. 108, to Wheaton’s International Law:

It is true that Chief Justice Marshall admitted the right of a nation to secure itself against intended violations of its laws by seizures made within reasonable limits, as to which, he said, nations must exercise comity and concession, and the exact extent of which was not settled; and, in the case before the court, the 4 leagues were not treated as rendering the seizure illegal. This remark must now be treated as an unwarranted admission. It may be said that the principle is settled; that municipal seizures can not be made for any purpose beyond territorial waters. It is also settled that the limit of these waters is, in the absence of treaty, the marine league or the cannon shot. It can not now be successfully maintained either that municipal visits or search may be made beyond territorial waters for special purposes or that there are different bounds of that territory for different objects. But as the line of territorial waters, if not fixed, is dependent on the unsettled range of artillery fire, and if fixed, must be by an arbitrary measure, the courts, in the earlier cases, were not strict as to standards of distance where no foreign powers intervened in the causes. In later times it is safe to infer that judicial as well as political tribunals will insist on one line of marine territorial jurisdiction for the exercise of force on foreign vessels in time of peace for all purposes alike.

The following comment of Wheaton has a distinct bearing on the subject:

Pirates being the common enemy of all mankind, and all nations having an equal interest in their apprehension and punishment, they may be lawfully captured on [Page 220]the high seas by the armed vessels of any particular State and brought within its territorial jurisdiction for trial in its tribunals.

This proposition, however, must be confined to piracy, as defined by the laws of nations, and can not be extended to offenses which are made piracy by municipal legislation. (Elements of International Law by Henry Wheaton, sixth edition, by Wm. Beach Lawrence, p. 185.)

But, however, while denying the right of the Russian Government to in any way interfere with the voyage of the C. H. White, the suspicions upon which she was arrested not having been substantiated must be regarded as unfounded.

Pirates as hostes humani generis should be pursued by all nations. It is justifiable to arrest, search, and deliver to justice at the nearest port, even be this a foreign port, every vessel legitimately suspected of piracy. It follows from which, in the application of this principle, since a vessel unjustly arrested is entitled to damages, etc. (F. de Martens, Treatise on International Law, Vol II, p. 342.)

Wheaton, in speaking of the suppression of the slave trade, says. (Elements of International Law, Lawrence, p. 193):

No nation could exercise the right of visitation and search upon the common and unappropriated parts of the ocean, except upon the belligerent claim. The right of visitation and search on the high seas did not exist in time of peace.

Ortolan says (Diplomatic de la Mer, T. 1, p. 149):

If it is possible that particular measures of surveillance, inspection, or police may be authorized by one flag to another, this could only exist in virtue of special and reciprocal treaties, obligatory only upon the contracting parties, and are of no effect as regards States which have not consented thereto.

Wheaton (p. 188) cites Hautefeuille in the following language:

La visite is not a rights but the exercise of a belligerent claim of injuring the enemy, which can not exist in time of peace except as a violation of the independence of nations. The right of visit he defines to be the power granted to a foreign ship of war to stop a vessel and to go on board of her, and verify by her papers if she belongs really to the nation whose flag she bears.

The decisions of the Paris tribunal of arbitration upon the question in dispute between the United States and Great Britain in regard to the fur-seal fisheries in Bering Sea must be considered as setting at rest any doubts as to the ownership in the seals beyond territorial limits or the right of seizure beyond such limits for purposes of preservation of the fisheries.

THE MEASURE OF DAMAGE.

The seizure of the C. H. White was therefore unwarrantable and unjustifiable, and the Russian Government has become responsible for all injuries to the parties in interest resulting from the seizure and confiscation of the vessel, as well as from all the other acts connected therewith.

The loss of the vessel itself is not the only direct injury sustained by these claimants in consequence of the confiscation of their vessel. The loss of the use and service of their schooner and her outfit during the season for the purpose for which she was equipped is also to be taken into consideration. This is an injury sustained, not alone by the owners, but by the officers and crew as well, who were thereby deprived of the means of earning their living. No one has the right to deprive another of the means of gaining his sustenance in any lawful calling which he may see fit to engage in. Equally, no one has the right, by a summary act, to divert the earning capacity of the invested capital of another. If the laborer is worthy of his hire, so also is invested capital entitled to its legitimate profits.

The damages sustained by these claimants can not be measured by [Page 221]the value of their vessel and its outfit alone. They had committed no trespass upon Russia, either by an invasion of her territory or waters, or by any other offense against Russian rights, and they were entitled to go peaceably on their way, employing their vessel and their own services in the lawful calling in which they were engaged. When the Russian Government, through its officers or agents, assumed to deprive them of this right it became responsible for all the consequences of its act. To restore to these parties, at the present time, their vessel or its value would not reimburse them for their losses, or place them in the advantageous position they occupied at the time of the seizure. Neither would the addition of interest on such payment compensate the parties for their loss. The owners had not embarked their capital in a hazardous undertaking upon the ocean to gain simply such interest as their money might earn at home by its investment in securities. In every well-regulated business undertaking, in which capital is involved, the interest upon the capital is deducted from the gross proceeds before profits are declared. As it is now impossible to put the parties back where they were at the time of the seizure, the only just basis of compensation for the injuries sustained by them owing to the seizure is upon a fair estimate of the probable catch, added to the value of the vessel and its outfit, together with interest upon the whole. As upon a sealing voyage the crew are compensated by lay in lieu of wages, such a basis discharges the indemnity due both to them and to the owners.

The damages here claimed for loss of catch are in no sense indirect damages for loss of speculative profits. They represent an actual loss sustained by the owners, officers, and crew, and are of the nature of demurrage. Had the Russian Government, at the moment of the seizure, handed over to the master of the C. H. White the full value of his vessel and equipment and returned him with his crew to San Francisco the voyage of the schooner would have been a positive loss to all the parties concerned. The earnings of a sealing vessel depend upon her taking advantage of her opportunity when it arrives, and the loss of her use with that of her outfit and crew in the middle of the season deprives her owners of any return upon their investment and her officers and crew of all remuneration for their labor.

The rule of damages is well settled that in a fishing voyage the loss of the services of a fishing vessel is to be compensated upon the value of the vessel’s use. The objection that prospective profits are not admissible as a substantive ground of damage does not apply or exclude the use of the average catch of a fishing vessel as evidence of the value of the vessel’s use, but is the best evidence, exactly as it is the evidence used in other cases to determine the injury suffered by a party from the deprivation of the use of his property.

In the case of the Costa Rica Packet, the distinguished arbitrator., Mr. F. de Martens, the official and permanent counsel of the Imperial Russian ministry of foreign affairs, in rendering his decision said, in the preamble to his award:

Whereas the unjustifiable detention of Captain Carpenter caused him to miss the best part of the whaling season;

Whereas on the other hand, Mr. Carpenter, on being set free, was in a position to have returned on board the ship Costa Rica Packet in January, 1892, at the latest; and whereas no conclusive proof has been produced by him to show that he was obliged to leave his ship until April, 1892, in the port of Tarnata without a master, or, still less, to sell her at a reduced price;

[Page 222]

Whereas the owners or the captain of the ship being under an obligation, as a precaution against the occurrence of some accident to the captain, to make provision for his being replaced, the mate of the Costa Rica Packet ought to have been fit to take command and to carry on the whaling industry; and

Whereas thus the losses sustained by the proprietor of the vessel Costa Rica Packet, the officers, and the crew, in consequence of the detention of Mr. Carpenter, are not entirely the necessary consequence of this precautionary detention.

Thus the arbitrator in this case, clearly admitting the justice of the claim for damages owing to the loss of the use of the vessel, found that certain contributory acts of negligence on the part of the parties in interest in the vessel so modified the degree of responsibility of the Dutch Government for the loss of use of the vessel as to entitle it to consideration in estimating the amount of the indemnity due.

In the case of the Potomac, before the Supreme Court of the United States, Mr. Justice Gray, in delivering the opinion of the court, said:

Both the questions of law presented by the record relate to the amount of the damages that the libellant is entitled to recover.

One question is as to the sum to be allowed for the detention of his vessel while repairing the injuries suffered by the collision. The rules of law governing this question are well settled, and the only difficulty is in applying them to the peculiar facts of the case.

In order to make full compensation and indemnity for what has been lost by the collision, restitutio in integrum, the owners of the injured vessel are entitled to recover for the loss of her use while laid up for repairs. When there is a market price for such use, the price is the test of the sum to be recovered. When there is no market price, evidence of the profits that she would have earned if not disabled is competent. (United States Reports, vol. 105, p. 630–632.)

In the case of Williamson v. Barrett, before the Supreme Court of the United States, Mr. Justice Nelson, in delivering the opinion of the Court, said:

As to the question of damages.

The jury were instructed, if they found for the plaintiffs, to give damages that would remunerate them for the loss necessarily incurred in raising the boat and repairing her, and also for the use of the boat during the time necessary to make the repairs and fit her for business.

By the use of the boat, we understand what she would produce to the plaintiffs by the hiring or chartering of her to run upon the river in the business in which she had been usually engaged.

The general rule in regulating damages in cases of collision is to allow the injured party an indemnity to the extent of the loss sustained. This rule is obvious enough; but there is a good deal of difficulty in stating the grounds upon which to arrive, in all cases, at the proper measure of that indemnity.

The expenses of raising the boat and of repairs may, of course, be readily ascertained, and in respect to repairs, no deduction is to be made, as in insurance cases, for the new materials in place of the old. The difficulty lies in estimating the damage sustained by the loss of service of the vessel while she is undergoing the repairs.

That an allowance short of some compensation for this loss would fail to be an indemnity for the injury is apparent. This question was directly before the court of admiralty in England in the case of the Gazelle, decided by Dr. Lushington in 1844. (2 W. Robinson, 279.) That was a case of collision, and in deciding it the court observed: “That the party who had suffered the injury is clearly entitled to an adequate compensation for any loss he may sustain for the detention of the vessel during the period which is necessary for the completion of the repairs and furnishing the new articles.”

In fixing the amount of the damages to be paid for the detention, the court allowed the gross freight, deducting so much as would in ordinary cases be disbursed on account of the ship’s expenses in earning it.

This rule may afford a very fair indemnity in cases where the repairs are completed within the period usually occupied in the voyage in which the freight is to be earned, but if a longer period is required it obviously falls short of an adequate allowance. It looks to the, capacity of the vessel to earn freight for the benefit of the owner and consequent loss while deprived of her service; in other words, to the amount she would earn him on hire. (13 Howard, 101.)

[Page 223]

In the case of the United States vessel, the Betsey, unlawfully detained by British authorities, the majority of the board of arbitration decided in favor of allowing to the claimant not only the value of the vessel and her cargo, but also the profits which would have been derived from the sale of her cargo had she been allowed to continue her voyage. The claims of the owners of the Neptune were similarly decided in 1795.

In the case of the American brig Williams, seized by the Mexican Government in 1829, the umpire awarded passage money, which would have been received if the brig had been permitted to continue her voyage to her immediate destination, where she expected to receive a cargo of passengers.

In the case of the Hope On, detained by the Chilean Government in 1883 at Talcahuano, the commission of arbitration, in rendering its award, said:

The principle is well established in cases like the present, that the loss of the use of the vessel is the proper measure of damages, and the loss of such use is the loss of her probable catch during her enforced absence from the fishing grounds. (G. B. Borden v. Chile.)

(See also the following cases: The Baltimore, 8 Wallace, 377–385; Cayuga, 14 Wallace, 270; Freddie L. Porter, 5 Federal Reports, 822; Vermont, 8 Federal Reports, 170; Brown v. Hicks, 24 Federal Reports, 811; Parsons v. Terry, 1 Lowell, 60; the Notting Hill, 9 Pro. Div., 105–113; the Parana, 2 Pro. Div., 118; the Mary Steele, 2 Lowell, 370–374; the Resolute, 8 Pro. Div., 109; the Clarence, William Reb., 283–286; the Gleaner, 38 L. T. N. S., 650; the Marsden Collision (2d edition, p. 115).

This rule was applied in the cases of the whaling ships James Maury, General Pike, Milo, and the bark Nile, captured by the Confederate cruiser Shenandoah and compelled to abandon their whaling voyages, in the decisions of the Court of Commissioners of Alabama Claims:

(See also: The Walter Pharo, 1 Lowell, 437; Stormless, 1 Lowell, 153; Mayflower, 1 Brown Adm., 376; Transit, 4 Ben., 138; Swift v. Brownell, 1 Holmes 467; the Antelope, 1 Lowell, 130; Bourne v. Smith, 1 Lowell, 547; Frates v. Howland, 2 Lowell, 36; Hussey v. Fields, 1 Sprague, 394–396; Knight v. Parsons, 1 Sprague, 279; two hundred and ninety Barrels of Oil, 1 Sprague, 279; Backster v. Rodman, 3 Pickering (Mass.), 435, 438, 439; Fletcher v. Taylor, 17 C. B., 21; Corey v. Thames Iron Works, L. R., 3, Q. B., 181; Ex parte Cambrian Steam Packet Co., L. R. 6 eq, 396; Cayuga, 2d Ben., 125; Barrett v. Williamson, 4 McLane, 589; Jolly v. Terra Haute, 4 McLane, 589.

This subject has recently undergone the most thorough and careful examination by the commission appointed to adjust the claims of the Canadian sealers against the Government of the United States, commonly known as the Bering Sea claims. It is scarcely necessary to do more than to refer to the arguments submitted before this tribunal on behalf of the English Government and of the American Government for the most complete and exhaustive review of all the decisions upon the subject.

The English Government contended for the rule as claimed in the present case. An examination of the awards made in certain cases before the Bering Sea Commission leaves no room for doubt that in those cases at least the commission adopted the rule as contended for by the English Government and as herein stated. In the awards upon [Page 224]all of these claims it is perfectly clear that the loss of catch was allowed in measuring the damages. If there were any doubt of this it is relieved by such cases as No. 14, the Triumph, where the sole claim was for loss of catch. In the case of the Triumph, No. 14 (not No. 11 for the same vessel) the award was $15,450; the original claim was for $19,674, of which $250 was for legal and other expenses, $19,424 being for balance of estimated catch of 2,500 skins at $8. It was admitted that the Triumph had transshipped part of her season’s catch before entering Bering Sea on or about July 4; a considerable part of the season had therefore already elapsed and it was reasonable to suppose that she had taken a fifth part of her probable catch before entering Bering Sea; thus 2,000 skins would remain to be taken to make up the season’s work of 2,500 skins. She had on board 72 skins when taken, leaving 1,928 to be taken to make up the 2,000. One thousand nine hundred and twenty-eight skins at $8 would amount to $15,424, and the award was for $15,450, as has been said.

There can be no possible room for doubt that this was the rule adopted by the Bering Sea Commission in fixing the damages in these cases. A careful examination of the cases shows that the rule here contended for was universally applied.

individual claims of lawrence m. furman, master, and of the crew.

In the claim of Lawrence M. Furman, the master of the C. H. White, for indemnity for the injuries suffered by him, the following facts must be taken into consideration in addition to the mere fact of the summary and unwarrantable arrest of this citizen of a friendly State by the agents of the Imperial Government of Russia, for no other reason than the suspicion that he and his subordinates had violated, or might in the future violate, the municipal laws of Russia. First, Captain Furman was compelled, under duress and threats of deportation to Siberia, and against his protest, to sign a document of which he could of his own knowledge have had no understanding of the contents, not speaking or understanding the Russian language, in which it was written. The claim that certain written comments made by him upon the document are evidence that he knew what he was signing can not be admitted. It is not improbable that the purport of the document was explained to him, but whether wholly or in part, or how exactly, there is no evidence to show; and in any case such an ex parte translation can not be said to have acquainted him with the exact meaning and bearing of the document, though it might suffice to indicate that some comment on his part was necessary. The whole transaction evinced a purpose to compel Furman by threats to sign a paper containing admissions he could not understand, with the object of relieving the Russian officers and Government of all liability. But apart from the question of whether or not he knew what he was signing, the use of threats to compel him to perform the act constituted a grievous wrong, which should be taken into account in measuring the damages which should be awarded to this citizen of the United States.

His subsequent close and penal confinement and the refusal of medical aid to him while suffering illness, caused by enforced exposure to which he was subjected, entailing permanent injury to his health; the indignities and hardships suffered by him, together with the loss of valuable personal effects, are all elements of which the sum amounts [Page 225]to a grave injury, for which he is entitled to fully adequate compensation from the Government whose agents or officers undertook to inflict upon him this great and unwarrantable wrong to his person and to his citizenship of a friendly State.

The damages suffered by the mate, Andrew Ronning, and the hunter, Neils Wolfgang, are only less in degree.

The loss by all of these officers of the C. H. White of the most valuable of their effects is of itself evidence of a disregard on the part of the Russian officials connected with this affair of the responsibilities and obligations incumbent on them in their relations with these citizens of a friendly State. That these officials, having taken it upon themselves to make these arrests on suspicion, should not have either at once put them in possession of their personal belongings or carefully sealed them up in such a manner as to preclude the possibility of their loss by accident or by the pilfering of dishonest persons, indicates a reckless disregard of the personal rights of their prisoners which must go far to convince the judicial mind of the likelihood of their committing other acts of wrong in their treatment of them. Doubtless these are the isolated acts of individuals which in no sense reflect upon either the humanity or the sense of right of the Russian Government; but that Government, having clothed these their agents with the powers they exercised, became responsible for their wrongful acts.

One has only to consider the size of the building in which the crew was confined, and the number of persons there incarcerated, for evidence of the general harshness with which these people were treated. This building was 18 feet long by 10 feet wide, and in it were confined 38 men, namely, 14 from the C. H. White and 24 others from other vessels. Supposing that these prisoners lay in three rows upon the floor, each man would have a space of 10 inches in width, in two of the rows, and of a little over 9 inches in the third row.

The bill of damages hereto annexed is submitted in the confident belief that it will be found to present an entirely equitable claim for the indemnity due to the owners, officers, and crew of the C. H. White for the losses and injuries suffered by them.

Statement of damages.

Value of vessel and equipment. $35,000.00
20 seal skins, at $14 each 280.00
8 barrels of mackerel 160.00
1 ton of codfish 260.00
Loss of probable catch, 2,480 seals, at $14 each 34,720.00
Loss of probable catch of fish 10,300.00
Personal claims of Captain Furman 25,000.00
Personal claims of Andrew Ronning 15,000.00
Personal claims of Neils Wolfgang 10,000.00
Claims of the crew for imprisonment, physical and moral suffering, and injury to health, 10 men, at $2,000 each 20,000.00
Interest at 6 per cent for nine years 81,388.80
Total 232,108.80
[Page 226]

EXHIBIT A.

No. 6616.—United States of America.

department of state.

To all to whom these presents shall come, greeting:

I certify that the document hereunto annexed is under the seal of the State of California, and is entitled to full faith and credit.

In testimony whereof I, John Hay, Secretary of State of the United States, have hereunto subscribed my name, and caused the seal of the Department of State to be affixed.


John Hay.

[Seal of the State Department.]

I, C. F. Curry, secretary of state of the State of California, do hereby certify that I have carefully compared the annexed copy of certificate of incorporation of Eagle Fishing Company with the original now in my office, and that the same is a correct transcript therefrom, and of the whole thereof. Also, that this authentication is in due form and by the proper officer.


C. F. Curry, Secretary of State.

[The great seal of the State of California.]

10 cent stamp.

9/8/1900.

C. F. C.

I, Edwin G. Waite, secretary of the State of California, do hereby certify that a copy of the articles of incorporation of Eagle Fishing Company, certified by the county clerk of the city and county of San Francisco as a copy of such articles filed in his office, was filed in this office on the 29th day of September, A. D. 1891, which articles and the copy thereof contained the required statement of facts, to wit: First, the name of the corporation as aforesaid; second, the purpose for which it is formed; third, the place where its principal business is to be transacted; fourth, the term for which it is to exist; fifth, the number of its directors or trustees, and the names and residences of those who are appointed for the first year; sixth, the amount of its capital stock, and the number of shares into which it is divided; seventh, the amount of its capital stock actually subscribed and by whom.


E. G. Waite,
Secretary of State.

Signed by Wm. H. Stevens,
Deputy.

[Great seal of State.]

[Page 227]

EXHIBIT B.

No. 6615.—United States of America.

department of state.

To all to whom these presents shall come, greeting:

I certify that the document hereunto annexed is under the seal of the Treasury Department, and is entitled to full faith and credit.

In testimony whereof I, John Hay, Secretary of State of the United States, have hereunto subscribed my name and caused the seal of the Department of State to be affixed.


John Hay.

[Seal of Department of State.]

Division of Appointments.

This is to certify that N. S. Farley and Stanley Jackson were deputy collectors of customs at the port of San Francisco on November 19, 1900, and September 8, 1900, respectively, the dates upon which the inclosed papers bearing their signatures were executed, and that they were duly authorized to sign as such officers on the respective dates above named, the signatures appearing thereon being identical with those attached to official papers in the files of this office.

[seal.]
Gage, Secretary.

I hereby certify that the American schooner C. H. White, of San Francisco, of 84 tons or thereabouts, cleared at this port, for hunting and fishing, on the 6th day of May, 1892, and that L. M. Furman was master, as appears by the records of this office.

N. S. Farley,
Deputy Collector of Customs.
Craig.

EXHIBIT C.

[Cat. No. 526—Certificate of ownership of vessel.]

I hereby certify that, according to the records of this office, the schooner called the C. H. White, of San Francisco, tonnage 84 and 45 tons net, was registered at this office, October 12, 1891, and the following were her owners, viz:

Eagle Fishing Company, of San Francisco, a corporation duly organized under the laws of the State of California, sole owner of said vessel, and there is no mortgage or lien on record against said vessel in this office.


______ _______,
Deputy Collector.

[Seal of the collector of customs.]

September 8, 1900.

10-cent stamp. Paid.

[Page 228]

EXHIBIT D.

[Gardner & Thornley, ship and custom-house brokers, No. 322 Washington street.—Outward foreign manifest.]

(New form.)

Report and manifest of the cargo laden at the port of San Francisco on hoard the American schooner C. H. White, whereof Furman is master, hound for hunting and fishing, May 6, 1892.

Marks. Numbers. Packages and contents. Quantities, pounds, gallons, etc. No. 1. Value of domestic merchandise. No. 2. Value of foreign merchandise free. No. 3. Value of foreign merchandise from bonded warehouse. No. 4. Value of foreign merchandise not from bonded warehouse, which has paid duties. No. 5. Value of foreign merchandise on the passage (in transitu) from one foreign country to another. To be landed at—
7 breech-loading shot guns $35.00
13 breech-loading rifles. 65.00
300 pounds shot 20.00
3,000 primers 15.00
3,000 wads 15.00
500 shells 7.50
7 Kegs power 40.00

Bond filed May 6, 1892.

W. P. Saxe, Bond Clerk.

District and Port of San Francisco,
Collector’s Office
, October 12, 1892.

I hereby certify the above to be a true copy of the original on file in this office.

John T. Dare, Deputy Collector.

Master’s or conductor’s oath on clearing outward.

District and Port of San Francisco:

I, L. M. Furman, master or conductor of the schooner C. H. White, bound from the port of San Francisco to hunting and fishing, solemnly, sincerely, and truly swear that the manifest of the cargo on board the said schooner now delivered by me to the collector of this district, and subscribed with my name, contains, according to the best of my knowledge and belief, a full, just, and true account of all the goods, wares, and merchandise now actually laden on board the said vessel or vehicle, and of the value thereof; and if any other goods, wares, or merchandise shall be laden or put on board the said schooner previous to her departure from this port I will immediately report the same to the collector. I do also swear that I verily believe the duties on all foreign merchandise therein specified have been paid or secured according to law, and that no part thereof is intended to be relanded within the United States; and that if, by distress or other unavoidable accident, it shall become necessary to reland the same, I will forthwith make a just and true report thereof to the collector of customs in the districts wherein such distress or accident may happen. And said cargo is truly intended to be landed in the port of——. So help me God.

L. M. Furman, Master.

Sworn to before me this 6th day of May, 1892.

John T. Dare,
Deputy Collector of Customs.
[Page 229]

EXHIBIT E.

Minor.]

Certified copy of act of naturalization.—No. 210.

In the superior court of the city and county of San Francisco, State of California. Present: Hon. Jas. Troutt, judge.

In the matter of the application of Mels Wolfgang, an alien, to become a citizen of the United States of America.

In open court, department No, 11, this 26th day of April, A. D. 1892.

It appearing, to the satisfaction of this court, by the oaths of Alfred E. Janssen and Charles E. Rivard, citizens of the United States of America, witnesses for that purpose, first duly sworn and examined, that Niels Wolfgang, a native of Denmark, has resided in the United States of America three years next preceding his arriving at the age of 21 years, and that he has continued to reside in the United States to the present time, and has resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the, United. States five years at least last past, and within the State of California for one year last past; and that during all of said five years’ time he has behaved as a man of good moral character, attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States, and well disposed to the good order and happiness of the same; and the said applicant has declared his intention to become a citizen of the United States, and having now here before this court taken an oath that he will support the Constitution of the United States of America, and that he doth absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to every foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty whatever, and particularly to the King of Denmark, it is therefore ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the said Niels Wolfgang be, and he is hereby, admitted and declared to be a citizen of the United States of America.

Jas. M. Troutt, Judge.
Niels Wolfgang,
Residence, 250 Spear Street.

Witnesses:
Alfred Janssen,
Residence, 250 Spear Street
.
Charles E. Rivard,
Residence, 250 Spear Street
.

City and County of San Francisco, State of California, ss:

I, William J. Blattner, county clerk and ex officio clerk of the superior court in and for the city and county of San Francisco, State of California, said court being a court of record, having common-law jurisdiction and a clerk and seal, do certify that the above is a true copy of the act of naturalization of Niels Wolfgang as the same appears upon the records of said court now in my office.


[seal.]
Wm. J. Blattner, Clerk
,
By
Geo. S. McComb. Deputy Clerk.

EXHIBIT F.

United States of America.

Massachusetts District, ss:

To all people to whom these presents shall come, greeting:

Know ye that at a special district court of the United States, holden at Boston, within and for the Massachusetts district, on the fifth day of March, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and eighty-six, Lars Magnus Furman, of Boston, in said district, a mariner born in Gottenburg, Sweden, having produced the evidence and taken and subscribed the oath required by law, was admitted to become [Page 230]a citizen of the United States according to the acts of Congress in such case made and provided.


[seal.]
Elisha Bassett,
Deputy Clerk of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts.

EXHIBIT G.

(1.)

The memorial of the Eagle Fishing Company to the Department of State of the United States respectfully shows:

That the Eagle Fishing Company is now, and was at the time when the claim hereinafter set forth had its origin, a corporation duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of California, and having its principal office and place of business in the city and county of San Francisco, State of California, and makes this claim and memorial in its right and for its own benefit.

That the names and residences of the stockholders, officers, and directors of said corporation are as follows, to wit:

Johan H. C. Prien, San Francisco, president; Charles W. Preiss, San Francisco, vice-president; Charles A. Wagner, San Francisco, secretary; Louis Schmidt, San Francisco, director; Lawrence M. Furman, master of vessel.

That the above-named stockholders own all of the capital stock of said Eagle Fishing Company, and that they and each of them are now, and were at the time when the claim hereinafter set forth had its origin, citizens of the United States, and duly qualified and registered voters in the city and county of San Francisco, State of California.

The said Eagle Fishing Company claims from the Russian Government the sum of $100,000, being the entire sum hereby claimed; the company believes that the sum so claimed would not reimburse it for the losses sustained by the wrongful act of the authorities of the Russian Government, hereinafter set forth; and that this company has received no money or other equivalent or indemnification from insurance or otherwise for the whole or any part of the loss or injury upon which this claim is founded.

That the said claim is based upon the following facts and circumstances, to wit:

The said Eagle Fishing Company, in pursuit of its regular and legitimate business, was at all the times herein mentioned the owner of the American schooner C. H. White, which said schooner was enrolled and registered in the port of San Francisco, and said schooner was regularly cleared from said port for a fishing and hunting voyage in the North Pacific Ocean or elsewhere, as the master might direct, having at the time on board said vessel a hunting and fishing outfit, consisting of rifles, shotguns, powder, and hunting and fishing gear, all of which will more fully and at large appear by the certified copies of the original clearance papers and outward manifest of said schooner, which are herewith filed, and that the reason why the original of all the said papers are not filed is that all of said original papers were seized as hereinafter mentioned.

That Lawrence M. Furman, one of the stockholders and directors of the Eagle Fishing Company, was then, and at all the times hereinafter mentioned, the fully acting and qualified master of the said schooner, and is now, and was at the time when the claim herein set forth had its origin, a citizen of the United States of America and of the State of California, and that the said Eagle Fishing Company was, prior to and at all the times hereinafter mentioned, and now is, the owner of a fishing station on Atu Island, the most westerly of the Aleutian Islands, belonging to the United States; that the said schooner C. H. White, on the 7th day of May, A. D. 1892, under command of the said master, and with a good and sufficient crew and a hunting and fishing outfit on board, as aforesaid, did set sail and depart from the said port of San Francisco, bound for the North Pacific Ocean, said vessel being at the time and at all the times hereinafter mentioned seaworthy, and in all respects fit for the voyage which it took, as herein mentioned; that the master and crew proceeded with said vessel on their voyage without disaster of any kind until the 15th day of July, A. D. 1892, and that prior to said day and in the open Pacific Ocean, more than 30 miles south of the Aleutian Islands,” and not in Russian waters, had [Page 231]caught 8 barrels of mackerel and 1 ton of codfish, and had killed 20 seals, all of which were caught and killed on the voyage from San Francisco, and more than 30 miles south of the Aleutian Islands, and not in Russian waters; that said master and crew, on about the 12th day of July, A. D. 1892, being then fishing about 40 miles south of Agattou Island, one of the Aleutian Islands, with said vessel, then set sail for the Kurile Islands, off the coast of Japan, intending to fish there, and the master of said schooner, finding that his chronometer was out, wanted to sight land to correct the chronometer, and accordingly deviated from his course or route to Kurile Islands for the purpose of sighting either Copper or Bering Island to correct his chronometer, and on the 15th day of July arrived at latitude 54° 18’ north, longitude 167° 19’ east, by correct observation, and had not fished or sealed in said place, nor at any place within 50 miles thereof, or in Russian waters at all, and the wind being light, but the vessel sailing on its course as aforesaid, and no boats being out from said vessel, either for hunting or fishing, and no one from said vessel being either hunting or fishing.

Said latitude 54° 18’ north, longitude 167° 19’east by correct observation, measured on the United States Coast Survey Chart, No. 900, more than 80 miles from Cooper or Bering islands on the high seas, and not in Russian waters, when, at said time, and in the latitude and longitude above mentioned, on the 15th day of July, A. D. 1892, as aforesaid, and not being at the time hunting or fishing, and not having at any time fished or hunted seals in Russian waters, but being at said time on its course for the Kurile Islands, as aforesaid, the said schooner was boarded by an officer from the Russian war cruiser Zabiaca, which said war cruiser Zabiaca was at all the times herein mentioned a steamer regularly commissioned as a war cruiser, and belonging to the Russian Government; armed for offensive and defensive warfare, and acting under the authority and by the direction of the said Russian Government, and the master was by said officer ordered to come on board of said cruiser, with all the schooner’s papers; the master accordingly went on board, and the captain of said cruiser, after examining the schooner’s papers, arrested the master, and then had all the crew of said cruiser [sic] except the mate, brought on board of said cruiser, and master and crew of said schooner were kept on said cruiser as prisoners. The said Russian cruiser then and there seized said schooner C. H: White and towed it to Nicholovsky Bay, Bering Island, and then placed said schooner under a prize crew and sent it to Petropaulovsky, and the cruiser, with the master and crew of said schooner as prisoners, sailed to Petropaulovsky, and arrived there on the 20th day of July, A. D. 1892.

The Russian Government seized said schooner C. H. White as hereinbefore set forth, but this company does not know what disposition was made of said schooner, but is advised and believes, and therefore alleges, that said schooner was repainted and refitted and used by said Russian Government, and is now in its possession, and by it used.

That the master of said schooner C. H. White duly protested at the time to the captain of said war cruiser against the seizure of said vessel and against all the other acts herein complained of; that on the 5th day of August, A. D. 1892, the said master duly noted a protest against said seizure and said acts with the governor of Petropaulovsky; and that said master on the 31st day of August, A. D. 1892, duly made a marine protest against said seizure to James G. Swan, a notary public in and for Port Townsend, State of Washington, United States of America, immediately upon his arrival at said city, and said city being the first place in the United States at which he arrived.

That the seizure of said schooner C. H. White and all of said acts by said Russian war cruiser by the officers thereof and by the Russian officials were in violation of the law of nations and of the right of citizens of the United States, and in contravention to the treaties existing between the United States of America and Russia, and that this claim is founded upon the principles of international law and the rights which every nation and every person has upon the high seas, and upon the fact that all the above-mentioned acts by the Russian Government and its officials were in violation thereof.

Wherefore this company hereby requests the interposition of the Government of the United States of America against the Russian Government for the presentation of this claim against the Russian Government.


Eagle Fishing Company,
By
Johan H. C. Prien, President.

[seal.]
Chas. A. Wagner, Secretary.
[Page 232]

State of California, City and County of San Francisco:

Johan H. C. Prien, being duly sworn, says: I am an officer, to wit, the president of the Eagle Fishing Company, the company making and subscribing the above memorial to the Department of State.

I have made the foregoing memorial and know the contents thereof, and the same is true of my own knowledge, except as to those matters which are therein stated on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe it to be true.

Johan H. C. Prien.

Subscribed and sworn to by the said Johan H. C. Prien, known to me to be a credible witness, before me this 3d day of November.

Harry J. Lask,
Notary Public in and for the City and County of San Francisco, State of California.

EXHIBIT G.

(2.)

State of California, City and County of San Francisco, ss:

Lawrence Magnus Furman, being duly sworn, deposes and says as follows, to wit:

My full name is Lawrence Magnus Furman; I am 37 years of age; I was born in the city of Guttenburg, Sweden; I am now a resident, and at all the times when the events took place in regard to which I make this affidavit I was a resident of the city and county of San Francisco, State of California; I am now and at all the times when the events took place in regard to which I make this affidavit, I was by occupation a master mariner; I have an interest in the claim of the Eagle Fishing Company against the Russian Government, to support which claim I make this affidavit, that interest is as follows: I own one share of the capital stock of the Eagle Fishing Company, and am director thereof; I have no contingent interest in said claim other than should said Eagle Fishing Company recover damages I will receive a dividend of the amount recovered as owner of said share of stock. There are 1,500 shares of the stock of said corporation now in force. I am not the agent or attorney for the said claimant or for any person having an interest in said claim. I am a duly naturalized citizen of the United States of America, but I can not now produce a certified copy of the record of my said naturalization, but will hereafter produce the same if necessary.

I was on the 7th day of May, A. D. 1892, the duly acting and qualified master of the American schooner C. H. White, belonging to said Eagle Fishing Company, which said vessel on said day duly cleared from said port of San Francisco for a hunting and fishing voyage in the North Pacific Ocean, having at the time all necessary and requisite legal papers on board, as will more fully and at large appear by the memorial and papers on file herein; on said day I was master, as aforesaid, did in and with said schooner set sail and depart from the said port of San Francisco, bound for the North Pacific Ocean, said vessel being at that time and at all the times hereinafter mentioned seaworthy and in all respects fit for the voyage which it took, as herein mentioned; I proceeded with said vessel and crew on my voyage without disaster of any kind, until the 15th day of July, A. D. 1892, and prior to said day and in the open Pacific Ocean, more than 30 miles south of the Aleutian Islands and not in Russian waters, had caught 8 barrels of mackerel and 1 ton of codfish and had killed 20 seals, all of which were caught and killed on the voyage from San Francisco and more than 30 miles south of the Aleutian Islands and not in Russian waters; I with said vessel and crew on or about the 12th day of July, A. D. 1892, being then fishing about 40 miles south of Agattou Island, one of the Aleutian Islands, set sail for the Kurile Islands off the coast of Japan, intending to fish there, and knowing that my chronometer was out, wanted to sight land to correct my chronometer, and accordingly deviated toward the Copper and Bering islands for the purpose of sighting them or one of them and correcting my chronometer, as aforesaid, and on the 15th day of July arrived at latitude 54° 16’ north, longitude 167° 18’ east, by correct observation, and had not fished or sealed in said place nor at any place within 50 miles thereof, or in Russian waters at all, and the wind being light, but the vessel sailing on its course as aforesaid, and no boats being out from said vessel, either for hunting or fishing, and no one from said vessel being either hunting or fishing.

Said latitude 54° 18’ north, longitude 167° 19’ east, is, by correct observation, measured by me on the United States Coast Survey Chart, No. 900, more than 80 [Page 233]miles from Copper or Bering islands on the high seas, and not in Russian waters; when at said time, and in the latitude and longitude above mentioned, on the 15th day of July, A. D. 1892, as aforesaid, and not being at the time hunting or, fishing, and not having at any time fished or hunted seals in Russian waters, but being at said time on my course for the Kurile Islands, as aforesaid, the said schooner was boarded by an officer from the Russian war cruiser Zabiaca, which said war cruiser Zabiaca was at all times herein mentioned a regularly commissioned war cruiser, belonging to the Russian Government, armed for offensive and defensive warefare, and acting under the authority and by the directions of the said Russian Government, and I was by said Russian officer ordered to come on board of said cruiser with all the schooner’s papers; I accordingly went on board, and the captain of said cruiser, after examining the schooner’s papers, arrested me, and then all of the crew of the said schooner, except the mate, were brought on board of said schooner as prisoners. The said Russian cruiser then and there seized said schooner, C. H. White, and towed it to Mcholovsky Bay, Bering Island, and then placed said schooner under a prize crew and sent it to Petropaulovsky, and the cruiser with me and the crew of said schooner as prisoners, sailed to Petropaulovsky and arrived there on the 20th day of July, A. D. 1892; and while on board of said cruiser, I was by the captain of said cruiser forced to sign a paper in Russian, which I did not understand, the said captain threatening to send me to Siberia unless I signed said paper, and I only signed said paper under a protest in consequence of said threat and the duress exercised by said captain of said cruiser.

The Russian Government seized said schooner C. H. White, as herein set forth, but I do not know what disposition was made of said schooner, but I am advised and believe, and therefore allege, that said schooner was repainted and refitted and used by said Russian Government, and is now in its possession and by it used.

I, as master of said schooner C. H. White, duly protested at the time to the captain of the said war cruiser against the seizure of said vessel and against all his other acts herein testified in regard to; and on the 5th day of August, 1898, I, as master, duly noted a protest against said seizure and said acts with the governor of Petropaulovsky; and I, as said master, on the 31st day of August, 1892, duly made a regular marine protest against said seizure to James G. Swan, a notary public in and for Port Townsend, State of Washington, United States of America, immediately upon my arrival at said city, and said city being the first place in the United States at which I arrived.

Lawrence M. Furman.

Subscribed and sworn to by the said Lawrence M. Furman, known to me to be a credible witness, before me this 3d day of November, A. D. 1892.

Harry J. Lask,
Notary Public in and for the City and County of San Francisco, State of California.

EXHIBIT H.

The memorial of Lawrence Magnus Furman to the Department of State, respectfully shows:

That said Lawrence M. Furman is now, and was at the time when the claim hereinafter set forth had its origin, a regularly naturalized citizen of the United States, and that he is unable to produce herewith a duly certified copy of the record of his naturalization, but will hereafter produce the same if required; that he is now, and was at the time when the claim hereinafter set forth had its origin, a resident of the city and county of San Francisco, State of California, and a duly qualified and registered voter therein.

That said Lawrence M. Furman claims from the Russian Government the sum of $25,000, being the entire sum hereby claimed; this claimant believes that the sum so claimed would not reimburse him for the loss and damage sustained by him from the wrongful acts of the authorities of the Russian Government hereinafter set forth, and that this claimant has received no money or other equivalent or indemnification from insurance or otherwise for the whole or any part of the loss or injury upon which this claim is founded.

That the said claim is based upon the following facts and circumstances, to wit:

That I, the said Lawrence M. Furman, on the 7th day of May, A. D. 1892, was the duly acting and qualified master of the American schooner C. H. White, belonging to the Eagle Fishing Company, of San Francisco, Cal., which said vessel on said [Page 234]day cleared from the said port of San Francisco for a hunting and fishing voyage in the North Pacific Ocean, having at the time all the necessary and legal papers on board, as will more fully and at large appear by the memorial, and papers in support thereof, of said Eagle Fishing Company on file in this Department, and that on the said day I with said vessel and a good and sufficient crew did set sail and depart from said port of San Francisco, bound for the North Pacific Ocean, said vessel being at that time and at all times hereinafter mentioned seaworthy and in all respects fit for the voyage which it took, as herein mentioned. I proceeded with said vessel and crew on my voyage without disaster of any kind until the 15th day of July, A. D. 1892, and that prior to said day, and in the open Pacific Ocean, more than 30 miles south of the Aleutian Islands, and not in Russian waters, had caught 8 barrels of mackerel and 1 ton of codfish, and had killed 20 seals, all of which were caught and killed on the voyage from San Francisco, and more than 30 miles south of the Aleutian Islands, and not in Russian waters; that about the 12th day of July, A. D. 1892, I, being then fishing about 40 miles south of Agattou Island, one of the Aleutian Islands, off the coast of Japan, intending to fish there, and then finding that my chronometer was out, wanted to sight land to correct the chronometer, and, accordingly, deviated from my course or route to the Kurile Islands for the purpose of sighting either Copper or Bering Island, to correct my chronometer, and on the 15th day of July arrived at latitude 54° 18’ north, longitude 167° 19’ east, by correct observation, and had not fished or sealed in said place nor at any place within 50 miles thereof, or in Russian waters at all; and the wind being light, but the vessel sailing on its course as aforesaid, and no boats being out from said vessel, either for hunting or fishing, and neither I nor anyone from said vessel being either hunting or fishing.

Said latitude 54° 18’ north, longitude 167° 19’ east, is by correct observation measured by me on the United States Coast Survey chart No. 900 more than 80 miles from Copper or Bering Islands, on the high seas, and not in Russian waters; when at the same time, and in the same latitude and longitude above mentioned, on the 15th day of July, A. D. 1892, as aforesaid, and not being at the time hunting or fishing, and not having at any time fished or hunted seals in Russian waters, but being at said time on my course for the Kurile Islands as aforesaid, the said schooner was boarded by an officer from the Russian war cruiser Zabiaca, which said war cruiser Zabiaca was at all times herein mentioned a steamer regularly commissioned as a war cruiser, and belonging to the Russian Government, armed for offensive and defensive warfare, and acting under the authority and by the directions of the said Russian Government; and I was by said officer ordered to come on board of said cruiser with all the schooner’s papers; and I accordingly went on board, and the captain of said cruiser, after examining the schooner’s papers, had all the crew of said schooner brought on board of said cruiser, and I, with all the crew of said schooner, was then and there arrested, and I was compelled by the officers of said cruiser to sign a paper in Russian language, which I do not understand, under threat of being sent to Siberia, and was kept on said cruiser as prisoner by the officers thereof until the cruiser arrived at Petropaulovsky, on the 20th day of July, A. D. 1892; I was kept confined in a room of said cruiser without bedclothes or any change of clothing, although I demanded my personal effects from the officers of the cruiser, which demand was refused by them.

The said cruiser, with me and the rest of the crew as prisoners, and with the schooner C. H. White in tow, set sail for Nicholovsky Bay, where we arrived on the 16th day of July, A. D. 1892. During the day and night which elapsed prior to our arrival at Nicholovsky Bay I was kept in the above-mentioned room without any bedclothes or any clothing whatever except those I had on, and was compelled to keep the doors and windows open; the weather during that night was cold and foggy, and I then and there, from the cruel and unnecessary exposure, caught cold, from which, owing to the exposure above and the exposure and ill treatment and lack of food and medicines hereinafter complained of, I have never recovered.

Upon our arrival at Nicholovsky Bay I was permitted to go on board the C. H. White, under the charge of an armed guard, for the purpose of getting my personal effects. I then took possession of my effects with the exception of the following articles, to wit: One chronometer, valued at $125; 1 pair of marine glasses, valued at $25; 1 aneroid barometer, valued at $7; 1 thermometer, valued at $1; 1 lot of charts, valued at $25; 1 lot of nautical books, valued at $15; 1 silver watch and gold chain, valued at $40; 7 razors, valued at $15; 1 coal-oil stove and utensils, valued at $3; 1 pair of rubber boots, valued at $5; 1 lot of clothing, valued at $25; 2 shotguns, valued at $96; 2 rifles, valued at $32; which I was informed and believe, and therefore allege, to have been stolen by the officers and crew of the said Zabiaca, and which I then and there demanded from the officers of the said cruiser, but which were not then nor afterwards returned to me.

[Page 235]

On my return to the Zabiaca, under guard, I was so sick from the exposure hereinabove complained of that I went to bed and asked to see the doctor, and saw him, but he refused to give me any medicine. I then asked to see any of my crew, but was informed that I could not see or speak with or communicate with any of my crew, but was permitted to send through a Russian sailor to my steward, who made me some flaxseed tea, which was all the medicine I could get while suffering from the cold and fever brought on by the exposure complained of; and during my detention on the Zabiaca I could procure no suitable food; and from said exposure, lack of food, brutal treatment, and lack of medicine I suffered great mental and physical pain and agony, and was confined to my bed during the balance of the voyage to Petropaulovsky, at which port we arrived on the 20th day of July, A. D. 1892, as hereinbefore stated. Upon our arrival at said port I was, notwithstanding my sickness, compelled by the Russian officers to go on shore and get along as best I could.

Upon landing I went to the governor of Petropaulovsk and demanded assistance. The governor allowed 15 kopecks—worth about 7 cents United States money—per diem for the support of the crew, and I was informed we were all prisoners, and that was all that would be allowed. I then asked for shelter for myself and men, but the only shelter given for my crew, consisting of 10 white men and 4 Indians, together with 24 other men belonging to other vessels which had been seized by the Russians, was a room 10 feet by 18 feet, with a leaky roof and broken windows. I, finding that the Russian officials would not provide other shelter for me, and being then sick, as aforesaid, and fearing death from exposure, asked the master of the American bark Majestic, then in port with coal for the Russian Fur Company, for assistance, but he had no spare room, and I obtained permission from him to sleep in the hatch house of the vessel, which was a small room erected at the hatchway, and was about 6 feet square by 6 feet high, and intended for keeping tools, etc. I slept in said hatch house until my arrival at Port Townsend, as hereinafter set forth. The 15 kopecks per day allowed me by the Russian officials would only then purchase at Petropaulovsk one-half of a loaf of bread, which was insufficient to sustain life. I was therefore, having no money, compelled to beg a meal here and there to keep me alive, but was not even by that means enabled to get sufficient food to keep me from suffering from hunger.

I, with my crew, was kept at Petropaulovsk prisoner as aforesaid until the 8th day of August, A. D. 1892, suffering all the time from the sickness above set forth, and being, during all said period, unable to procure sufficient food or proper treatment. I have been suffering physically ever since, and I am now informed by my physician that I shall probably never fully recover my health.

On the 8th day of August, A. D. 1892, the Russian officials informed me that the master of the American bark Majestic would make arrangements to take us from Petropaulovsk; accordingly I, and the masters of the other vessels which had been seized by the Russians, made arrangements with the master of the said Majestic to take us with our respective crews—amounting in all to 84 men—to some United States or British port, and we then and there signed a statement of our condition and a request to our respective Governments to pay the owners of said Majestic for our passage. The Russian officials then allowed us an amount of beans, flour, salt beef, tea, coffee, and sugar, which would equal about two-thirds of the shortest allowance of each which would be permitted by the United States shipping laws, and ordered us all on board the Majestic, which said vessel carried us to Port Townsend, at which port we arrived on the 31st day of August, A. D. 1892.

During the time I was on board said Majestic I was on short allowance, and suffering much from exposure to the weather consequent on insufficient shelter.

I, as master of said schooner C. H. White, duly protested at the time to the captain of the Russian cruiser Zabiaca against the seizure of said vessel, and at the time protested against each and all of the inhuman and cruel acts by the Russian officials hereinbefore complained of, and duly noted a protest on the 5th day of August, A. D. 1892, to the Russian governor of Petropaulovsk, and I, on the 31st day of August, A. D. 1892, duly made a regular marine protest against said seizure and acts hereinbefore complained of to James G. Swan, a notary public in and for Port Townsend, State of Washington, United States of America, immediately upon my arrival at said city, and said city being the first place in the United States at which I arrived.

That the seizure of said schooner C. H. White and all of the cruel and inhuman acts of the officers of the Russian war cruiser Zabiaca and by the Russian officials committed upon me were in violation of the law of nations and of my rights as a citizen of the United States, and in contravention to the treaties existing between the United States and Russia, and that this claim is founded upon the principles of international law and the rights which every nation and every person has upon the [Page 236]high seas, and upon the fact that all the above-mentioned acts by the Russian Government and its officials were in violation thereof.

Wherefore, I hereby request the interposition of the Government of the United States of America against the Russian Government for the presentation of this claim against said Russian Government.


[seal.]
Lawrence Magnus Furman.

State of California, City and County of San Francisco, ss:

Lawrence M Furman, being duly sworn, says: I am the person making and subscribing the above memorial to the” Department of State.

I have read the foregoing memorial, and know the contents thereof; the same is true of my own knowledge, except as to those matters which are therein stated on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe it to be true.

Lawrence M. Furman.

Subscribed and sworn to before me by the said Lawrence M. Furman, known to me to be a credible witness, this 24th day of January, A. D. 1893.

[seal.]
Harry J. Lask,
Notary Public in and for the City and County of San Francisco, State of California.

State of California, City and County of San Francisco, ss:

I, M. C. Haley, county clerk of the city and county of San Francisco, State of California, and ex officio clerk of the superior court thereof (which court is a court of record, having a seal), do hereby certify that Harry J. Lask, whose name is subscribed to the annexed instrument and thereon written, and before whom the annexed oath was taken, was, at the time of taking such oath or affidavit, a notary public in and for the city and county, duly authorized to take the same, and an officer duly authorized by the laws of this State to take and certify the acknowledgment and proof of deeds to be recorded in said State. And further, that I am well acquainted with the handwriting of such officer, and verily believe that the signature to such jurat or certificate is genuine.


M. C. Haley, Clerk.

I, Eugene R. Garber, presiding judge of the superior court of the city and county of San Francisco, State of California, do hereby certify that said court is a court of record, having a clerk and seal; that M. C. Haley, who has signed the annexed attestation, is the duly elected and qualified county clerk of the city and county of San Francisco, and was, at the time of signing said attestation, ex officio clerk of said superior court; that said signature is his genuine handwriting, and that all his official acts as such clerk are entitled to full faith and credit. And I further certify that said attestation is in due form of law.


Eugene R. Garber,
Presiding Judge of the Superior Court.

State of California, City and County of San Francisco, ss:

I, M. C. Haley, county clerk of the city and county of San Francisco, State of California, do hereby certify that the Hon. Eugene R. Garber, whose name is subscribed to the preceding certificate, is presiding judge of the superior court of the city and county of San Francisco, State of California, duly elected and qualified, and that the signature of said judge to said certificate is genuine.


[seal.]
M. C. Haley,
County Clerk and Clerk of Court.
[Page 237]

EXHIBIT I.

The memorial of Andrew Ronning, sometimes called Romney, to the Department of State, respectfully shows:

That said Andrew Ronning is now, and was at the time when the claim hereinafter set forth had its origin, a regularly naturalized citizen of the United States, and that he is unable herewith to produce a duly certified copy of his naturalization, but will hereafter produce the same if required; and that he is now, and was at the time when the claim hereinafter set forth had its origin, a resident of the city and county of San Francisco, State of California, and a duly qualified and registered voter therein.

That said Andrew Ronning claims from the Russian Government the sum of $15,000, being the entire sum hereby claimed. This claimant believes that the sum so claimed would not reimburse him for the loss and damage sustained by him from the wrongful act of the authorities of the Russian Government hereinafter set forth, and that this claimant has received no money or other equivalent or idemnification from insurance or otherwise for the whole or any part of the loss or injury upon which this claim is founded.

That the said claim is based upon the following facts and circumstances, to wit:

That I, the said Andrew Ronning, on the 7th day of May, A. D. 1892, was the duly acting and qualified mate of the American schooner C. H. White, belonging to the Eagle Fishing Company, of San Francisco, Cal., which said vessel on said day cleared from the port of San Francisco for a hunting and fishing voyage in the North Pacific Ocean, having at the time all the necessary and legal papers on board, as will more fully and at large appear by the memorial and papers in support thereof of said Eagle Fishing Company on file in this Department, and that on said day I, as mate, with said vessel and a good and sufficient Crew, did set sail and depart from the port of San Francisco, bound for the North Pacific Ocean, said vessel being at that time and at all the times hereinafter mentioned seaworthy and in all respects fit for the voyage which it took, as herein mentioned. I proceeded with said vessel on my voyage without disaster of any kind until the 15th day of July, A. D. 1892, and that prior to said day, and in the open Pacific Ocean, more than 30 miles south of the Aleutian Islands, and not in Russian waters, had caught 8 barrels of mackerel and 1 ton of codfish, and had killed 20 seals, all of which were caught and killed on the voyage from San Francisco, and more than 30 miles south of the Aleutian Islands, and not in Russian waters; that about the 12th day of July, A. D. 1892, I being then fishing about 40 miles south of Agattou Island, one of the Aleutian Islands, with said vessel and crew, set sail for the Kurile Islands, off the coast of Japan, intending to fish there, and the master then finding that the chronometer was out, wanted to sight land to correct his chronometer, and accordingly deviated from the course or route to the Kurile Islands for the purpose of sighting either Copper or Bering Islands to correct the chronometer, and on the 15th day of July we arrived at latitude 54° 18’ north, longitude 167° 19’ east, by correct observation, and had not fished or sealed in said place nor at any place within 50 miles thereof, or in Russian waters at all, and the wind being light, but the vessel sailing on its course as aforesaid, and no boats being out from said vessel either for hunting or fishing, and neither I nor anyone from said vessel being either hunting or fishing.

Said latitude 54° 18’ north, longitude 167° 19’ east, is by correct observation measured by the master on the United States Coast Survey Chart, No. 900, more than 80 miles from Copper or Bering Islands on the high seas, and not in Russian waters, when at said time, and in the latitude and longitude above mentioned, on the 15th day of July, A. D. 1892, as aforesaid, and not being at the time hunting or fishing, and not having at any time fished or hunted seals in Russian waters, but being at said time on its course for the Kurile Islands, as aforesaid, the said schooner was boarded by an officer from the Russian war cruiser Zabiaca, which said war cruiser Zabiaca was at all the times herein mentioned a steamer regularly commissioned as a cruiser and belonging to the Russian Government, armed for offensive and defensive warfare, and acting under the authority and by the directions of the Russian Government, and the master was by said officer ordered to come on board of said cruiser with all the schooner’s papers. He accordingly went on board. Shortly afterwards the captain of said cruiser had me as well as all the crew of said schooner brought on board of said cruiser, and I, with the rest of the crew of said schooner, was then and there arrested, and I was sent with an armed prize crew back to the schooner C. H. White, and I remained a prisoner upon said schooner until it arrived at Petropaulovsky on the——day of July, 1892. During the voyage to Petropaulovsky the following articles belonging to me were stolen by the Russians: Two nautical books, valued at $10; 1 pair rubber boots, valued at $5; 1 oil-coat, valued at $5; 3 suits of [Page 238]underclothes, valued at $9; 7 pairs of socks, valued at $3.50; 1 watch and chain, valued at $23; 1 razor, valued at $3; 2 pocketknives, valued at $2; and, notwithstanding my repeated demands for them, they were never returned to me.

Upon landing at Petropaulovsky the master went to the governor and demanded assistance. The governor allowed 15 kopecks (worth about 7 cents United States money) per diem for the support of each of the crew, and was informed that we were all prisoners, and that no more money would be allowed for our support, and then asked for shelter for his crew; but the only shelter given me and the rest of the crew (consisting of 10 white men and 4 Indians, together with 24 other men belonging to other vessels which had been seized by the Russians) was a room 10 feet by 18 feet, with a leaky roof and broken windows, in which I was compelled to live during my stay in Petropaulovsky, which lasted till the 8th day of August, A. D. 1892, and during that time I had to live upon a half loaf of bread each day (that being all the 15 kopecks allowed by the Russian Government would then buy); the bread, together with what I could beg, was not sufficient to keep me from hunger. From the exposure to the damp and foggy weather during my imprisonment at Petropaulovsky, and from the insufficient food, I suffered great physical pain, from the effects of which I have not yet recovered.

On the 8th of August provision was made for the passage of myself and the other prisoners at Petropaulovsky (84 in all) to some American or British port. Accordingly, on said last-named day I was driven on board of the American bark Majestic, where, on account of insufficient food and accommodation, I suffered greatly during my passage to Port Townsend, where I arrived on the 31st day of August, A. D. 1893.

That many of the facts constituting the cruel acts by the Russian officials and showing their lack of humanity in matters pertaining to this claim are not in my direct knowledge, but are more fully and at large set forth in the memorandum of Lawrence M. Furman, of said schooner,C. H. White, to which said memorial reference is hereby made in support hereof.

The master of the said schooner C. H. White duly protested at the time to the captain of the Russian cruiser Zabiaca against the seizure of the said vessel, and at the time protested against each and all the inhuman and cruel acts by the Russian officials hereinbefore complained of, and duly noted a protest on the 5th day of August A. D. 1892, to the Russian governor of Petropaulovsky; and on the 31st day of August, A. D. 1892, duly made a regular marine protest against said seizure and acts hereinbefore complained of to James G. Swan, a notary public in and for Port Townsend, State of Washington, United States of America, immediately upon my arrival at said city, and said city being the first place in the United States at which I arrived, all of which said protest made before James G. Swan as aforesaid was also signed by me.

That the seizure of said schooner C. H. White, and all of the cruel and inhuman acts by the officers of the Russian war cruiser Zabiaca, and by the Russian officials committed upon me, were in violation of the law of nations and of my rights as a citizen of the United States, and in contravention to the treaties existing between the United States and Russia, and that this claim is founded upon the principles of international law and the rights which every person and every nation has upon the high seas, and upon the fact that all the above-mentioned acts by the Russian Government and its officials were in violation thereof.

Wherefore I hereby request the interposition of the Government of the United States of America against the Russian Government for the presentation of this claim against the said Russian Government.


[seal.]
Andrew Roning.

State of California, City and County of San Francisco, ss:

Andrew Roning, being duly sworn, says: I am the person making and subscribing the above memorial to the Department of State.

I have read the foregoing memorial and know the contents thereof. The same is true, of my own knowledge, except as to those matters which are therein stated on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe it to be true.

Andrew Roning.

Subscribed and sworn to before me by the said Andrew Roning, known to me to be a credible witness, this 24th day of January, A. D. 1893.

[seal.]
Harry J. Lask,
Notary Public in and for the City and County of San Francisco, State of California.
[Page 239]

State of California, City and County of San Francisco, ss:

I, M. C. Haley, county clerk of the city and county of San Francisco, State of California, and ex officio, clerk of the superior court thereof (which court is a court of record, having a seal), do hereby certify that Harry J. Lask, whose name is subscribed to the annexed instrument and thereon written, and before whom the annexed oath or affidavit was taken, was, at the time of taking the oath or affidavit, a notary public in and for the city and county of San Francisco, residing in said city and county, duly authorized by the laws of said State to take and certify the acknowledgment and proof of deeds to be recorded in said State. And further, that I am well acquainted with the handwriting of such officer, and verily believe that the signature to such jurat or certificate is genuine.


[seal.]
M. C. Haley.

I, Eugene R. Garber, presiding judge of the superior court of the city and county of San Francisco, State of California, do hereby certify that said court is a court of record, having a clerk and seal. That M. C. Haley, who has signed the annexed attestation, is the duly elected and qualified county clerk of the city and county of San Francisco, and was at the time of signing said attestation ex officio clerk of said superior court. That said signature is his genuine handwriting, and that all his official acts as such clerk are entitled to full faith and credit.

And I further certify that said attestation is in form of law.


Eugene R. Garber,
Presiding Judge of the said Superior Court

State of California, City and County of San Francisco, ss:

I, M. C. Haley, county clerk of the city and county of San Francisco, and ex officio clerk of the superior court of the city and county of San Francisco, State of California, do hereby certify that the Hon. Eugene R. Garber, whose name is subscribed to the preceding certificate, is presiding judge of the superior court of the city and county of San Francisco, State of California, duly elected and qualified, and that the signature of said judge to said certificate is genuine.


[seal.]
M. C. Haley,
County Clerk and Clerk of Court.

EXHIBIT J.

The memorial of Neils Wolfgang to the Department of State respectfully shows: That the said Neils Wolfgang is now and was at the time when the claim hereinafter set forth had its origin a regularly naturalized citizen of the United States, and that he is unable to produce herewith a duly certified copy of the record of his naturalization, but will hereafter produce the same if required; and that he is now, and was at the time when the claim hereinafter set forth had its origin, a resident of the city and county of San Francisco, State of California, and a duly qualified and registered voter therein.

That said Neils Wolfgang claims from the Russian Government the sum of $10,000, being the entire sum hereby claimed; this claimant believes that the sum so claimed would not reimburse him for the loss and damage sustained by him from the wrongful act of the authorities of the Russian Government hereinafter set forth, and that this claimant has received no money or other equivalent or indemnification from insurance or otherwise for the whole or any part of the loss or injury upon which this claim is founded.

That the said claim is based upon the following facts and circumstances, to wit:

That I, the said Neils Wolfgang, on the 7th day of May, A. D. 1892, was a duly acting and qualified hunter on the American schooner C. H. White, belonging to the Eagle Fishing Company, of San Francisco, Cal., which said vessel on said day cleared from said port of San Francisco for a hunting and fishing voyage in the North Pacific Ocean, having at the time all the necessary and legal papers on board, as will more fully and at large appear by the memorial and papers in support thereof of said Eagle Fishing Company on file in this Department, and that on said day I, as hunter with [Page 240]said vessel, and a good and sufficient crew, did set sail and depart from said port of San Francisco, bound for the North Pacific Ocean, said vessel being at that time and at all the times hereinafter mentioned seaworthy and in all respects fit for the voyage which it took, as herein mentioned. I proceeded with said vessel on my voyage without disaster of any kind until the 15th day of July, A. D. 1892, and that prior to that day and in the open Pacific Ocean, more than 30 miles south of the Aleutian Islands, and not in Russian waters, had caught 8 barrels of mackerel and 1 ton of codfish, and had killed 20 seals, all of which were caught and killed on the voyage from San Francisco, and more than 30 miles south of the Aleutian Islands, and not in Russian waters; and that about the 12th day of July, A. D. 1892, I being then fishing about 40 miles south of Agattou Island, one of the Aleutian Islands, with said vessel and crew, set sail for the Kurile Islands, off the coast of Japan, intending to fish there; and the master then finding that the chronometer was out, wanted to sight land to correct the chronometer, and accordingly deviated from the course of route to the Kurile Islands for the purpose of sighting either Copper or Bering Island to correct the chronometer, and on the 15th day of July we arrived at latitude 54° 18’ north, longitude 167° 19’ east, by correct observation, and had not fished or sealed in said place, nor at any place within 50 miles thereof, or in Russian waters at all, and the wind being light, but the vessel sailing on its course as aforesaid, and no boats being out from said vessel, either for hunting or fishing, and neither I nor anyone from said vessel being either hunting or fishing.

Said latitude 54° 18’ north, longitude 167° 19’ east, is by correct observation measured by the master on the United States Coast Survey Chart, No. 900, more than 80 miles from Copper or Bering Islands on the high seas, and not in Russian waters; when at the said time, and in the latitude and longitude above mentioned, on the 15th day of July A. D. 1892, as aforesaid, and not being at the time hunting or fishing, and not having at any time fished or hunted seals in Russian waters, but being at said time on its course for the Kurile Islands as aforesaid, the said schooner was boarded by an officer from the Russian war cruiser Zabiaca, which said war crusier Zabiaca was, at all the times herein mentioned, a steamer regularly commissioned as a war cruiser, and belonging to the Russian Government, armed for offensive and defensive warfare, and acting under the authority and by the directions of the said Russian Government, and the master was, by said officer, ordered to come on board of said cruiser with all the schooner’s papers; he accordingly went on board. Shortly afterwards the captain had me, as well as all the crew of said schooner, brought on board of said cruiser, and I, with the rest of the crew of said schooner, was then and there arrested, and was kept a prisoner on board of said cruiser until its arrival at Petropaulovsk on the 20th day of July, A. D. 1892, and whileon said cruiser I had no other clothing than those in which I stood, and suffered from exposure to the weather and from the insufficient food allowed me.

The following articles were stolen from me by the Russians: 1 lot of underwear, valued at $7; 1 lot of shoes, valued at $4.50; 1 pair of pants, valued at $7; 1 oilskin coat, valued at $3.50; 1 lot of socks, valued at $2; 1 pair of rubber boots, valued at $5; 1 gold ring, valued at $9; 1 knife, valued at 75 cents; 9 sealskins, valued at $18; and, notwithstanding my repeated demands for them, they were never returned to me.

Upon landing at Petropaulovsk the master went to the governor and demanded assistance. The governor allowed 15 kopecks—worth about 7 cents United States money—per diem for the support of each of the crew, and was informed that we were all prisoners, and that no more money would be allowed for our support. He then asked for shelter for his crew, but the only shelter given me and the rsst of the crew—consisting of 10 white men and 4 Indians, together with 24 other men belonging to other vessels which had been seized by the Russians—was a room 10 feet by 18 feet, with a leaky roof and broken windows, in which I was compelled to live during my stay in Petropaulovsk, which lasted until the 8th day of August, A. D. 1892, and during that time I had to live upon half a loaf of bread each day (that being all the 15 kopecks allowed by the Russian Government would then buy); the bread, together with what I could beg, was not sufficient to keep me from hunger. From the exposure to the damp and foggy weather during my imprisonment at Petropaulovsky, and from insufficient food, I suffered great physical pain, from the eflects of which I have not yet recovered.

On the 8th day of August provision was made for the passage of myself and the others at Petropaulovsky (84 in all) to some American or British port. Accordingly, on said last-named day, I was driven on board the American bark Majestic, where, on account of insufficient food and accommodation, I suffered greatly during my passage to Port Townsend, where I arrived on the 31st day of August, A. D. 1892.

That many of the facts constituting the cruel acts by the Russian officials, and showing their lack of humanity in matters pertaining to this claim, are not in my [Page 241]direct knowledge, but are more fully and at large set forth in the memorial of Lawrence M. Furman, master of said schooner C. H. White, to which said memorial reference is hereby made in support hereof.

The master of said schooner C. H. White duly protested at the time to the captain Of the Russian cruiser Zabiaca, against the seizure of the said vessel, and at the time protested against each and all of the inhuman and cruel acts by the Russian officials hereinbefore complained of, and duly noted a protest on the 5th day of August, A. D. 1892, to the Russian governor of Petropaulovsky; and on the 31st day of August, A. D. 1892, duly made a regular marine protest against such seizure and acts hereinbefore complained of to James G. Swan, a notary public in and for Port Townsend, State of Washington, United States of America, immediately upon my arrival at said city, and said city being the first place in the United States at which I arrived, all of which protests were made on my behalf, and the protest made before James G. Swan, as aforesaid, was also signed by me.

That the seizure of the said schooner C. H. White, and all the cruel and inhuman acts by the officers of the Russian war cruiser Zabiaca, and by the Russian officials committed upon me were in violation of the law of nations, and of my right as a citizen of the United States, and in contravention to the treaties existing between the United States and Russia; and that this claim is founded upon the principles of international law, and the rights which every nation and every person has upon the high seas, and upon the fact that all the above-mentioned acts by the Russian Government and its officials were in violation thereof.

Wherefore I hereby request the interposition of the Government of the United States of America against the Russian Government for the presentation of this claim against said Russian Government.


[seal.]
Neils Wolfgang.

State of California, City and County of San Francisco, ss:

I, M. C. Haley, county clerk of the city and county of San Francisco, State of California, and ex officio clerk of the superior court thereof (which court is a court of record, having a seal), do hereby certify that Harry J. Lask, whose name is subscribed to the annexed instrument and thereon written, and before whom the annexed oath or affidavit was taken, was at the time of taking such oath or affidavit, a notary public in and and for the city and county of San Francisco, residing in said city and county, duly authorized to take the same, and an officer duly authorized by the laws of said State to take and certify the acknowledgment and proof of deeds to be recorded in said State. And further, that I am well acquainted with the handwriting of such officer, and verily believe that the signature to such jurat or certificate is genuine.


[seal.]
M. C. Haley, Clerk.

I, Eugene R. Garber, presiding judge of the superior court of the city and county of San Francisco, State of California, do hereby certify that said court is a court of record, having a clerk and seal. That M. C. Haley, who has signed the annexed attestation, is the duly elected and qualified county clerk of the city and county of San Francisco, and was at the time of signing said attestation, ex officio clerk of said superior court. That said signature is his genuine handwriting, and that all his official acts as such clerk are entitled to full faith and credit.

And I further certify that said attestation is in due form of law.


Eugene R. Garber,
Presiding Judge of the said Superior Court.

State of California, City and County of San Francisco, ss:

I, M. C. Haley, county clerk of the city and county of San Francisco, and ex officio clerk of the superior court of the city and county of San Francisco, State of California, do hereby certify that the Hon. Eugene R. Garber, whose name is subscribed to the preceding certificate, is presiding judge of the superior court of the city and county [Page 242]of San Francisco, State of California, duly elected and qualified, and that the signature of said judge to said certificate is genuine.


[seal.]
M. C. Haley,
County Clerk and Clerk of Court.

State of California, City and County of San Francisco, ss:

Niels Wolfgang, being duly sworn, says: I am the person making and subscribing to the above memorial to the Department of State.

I have read the foregoing memorial and know the contents thereof; the same is true of my own knowledge, except as to those matters which are there stated on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe it to be true.

Niels Wolfgang.

Subscribed and sworn to before me by the said Niels Wolfgang, known to me to be a credible witness, this 24th day of January, A. D. 1892 [sic].

[seal.]
Harry J. Lask,
Notary Public in and for the City and County of San Francisco, State of California.

EXHIBIT K.

[Stamp.]

[James G. Swan, Port Townsend, Jefferson County, Wash.]

United States of America,
State of Washington, County of Jefferson, ss:

To all people whom these presents shall or may concern:

I, James G. Swan, a notary public in and for the county and State aforesaid, duly commissioned by the governor of said State in accordance with the laws thereof, dwelling in the city of Port Townsend, send greeting.

Know ye, that on this 31st day of August, A. D. 1892, before me, the said notary, at my office, personally appeared L. M. Furman, late master of the American schooner C. H. White, belonging to the port of San Francisco, Cal. (the said master having previously noted in due form of law his intention to protest), who, together with Andrew Romney, mate, and Niels Wolfgang, hunter, belonging to the aforesaid vessel, being by me duly sworn according to the laws of said State and of the United States of America, voluntarily and solemnly did depose and declare as follows, to wit, that they, the said appearers, on the 7th day of May, A. D. 1892, set sail and departed in and with the said vessel from the port of San Francisco, Cal., having on board a hunting and fishing outfit and bound for the North Pacific Ocean, the said vessel being then stout, staunch, and strong; her ballast, cargo, and stores well and sufficiently stowed and secured; well masted, manned, tackled, victualed, appareled, and appointed, and in every respect fit for sea and the voyage she was then about to undertake; that we proceeded on our voyage without disaster of any kind until the 15th day of July, A. D. 1892, when, being at that time on the high seas, in latitude 54° 18’ north, longitude 167° 19’ east, by correct observation; on the high seas, more than 30 miles from land, we were boarded by an officer from the Russian cruiser Zabiaca, Captain Deleveron, who ordered me to go on board the Zabiaca with all my papers, as the captain of the cruiser wanted to see my papers and me also.

I accordingly went on board in the officer’s boat, and when Captain Deleveron had examined my papers and found that I had cleared for hunting and fishing, he arrested me and put me under a guard of four marines armed, and ordered me to be kept separate from the crew and not to be allowed to speak to anybody. He then took all hands out of the schooner, except the mate, and put them under guard on board the cruiser, after searching them and taking from them everything they had, but the clothes they stood in. He then took the steamer in tow, and towed her to Nicolavisky Bay, Bering Island. It took twelve hours to tow us from where we were seized to Bering Island, where we arrived on the 16th of July at 10 o’clock a.m. The cruiser and schooner were anchored near each other. After we had anchored Captain Deleveron called me into his cabin and told me that the United States steamer Albatross, Captain Tanner, had been to Bering Island and had instructed him to seize any vessel he might come across which had a sealing outfit on board. He also [Page 243]showed me a list which Captain Tanner had given him of all the vessels which had cleared at San Francisco for hunting and fishing. The C. H. White’s name was not on that list, as I left San Francisco after the Albatross had sailed for the north. Captain Deleveron also showed me the proclamation and other American Government papers which Captain Tanner had left with him, but I did not read those papers. Captain Deleveron also told me that he could seize any sealing vessels from 1 mile to 1,000 miles off shore, he did not care where they were. I told him that I had a clearance from the San Francisco custom-house for a hunting and fishing voyage in the North Pacific Ocean, and I claimed that I was in the North Pacific Ocean at the time I was seized. He said it did not matter it was in Russian waters. I said that the fishing limits are 3 leagues or 9 miles off shore, and I was a long way outside of that limit. He said that it made no difference.

By actual measurement of the General Chart of Alaska, No. 900, United States Coast Survey, 1890, I make my position latitude 54° 18’ north. The Russians made it latitude 54° 30’ north. My distance by my measurement was 80 miles to the south of Bering Island, and the Russians make it 70 miles by their own statement. I consider my vessel as being at least 70 miles outside the limit set by all civilized nations as their jurisdiction over the high seas.

After I had undergone this court-martial I was told by Captain Deleveron that I might go on board the schooner and get my personal effects. I went on board the schooner the same day, July 16, and found that my room had been robbed and everything of value taken away. A list of articles lost is herewith filed and becomes a part of this protest, together with the bills of the officers and Indians as claims. The next day (July 17) I was called to the cabin, and a paper in the Russian language, which I do not understand, was presented to me to sign. I refused to sign what I did not comprehend, and protested against this injustice. Captain Deleveron told me I could have my choice, either to sign the paper or go to Vladivostock and be court-martialed and sent to Siberia, as I would have no one to defend me. I then signed the paper under protest, which I was given to understand was an acknowledgment on my part that I had been sealing in Russian waters.

July 18 we left Bering Island for Petropaulousk and arrived there on the 20th.

On the 5th of August I noted a protest with the governor of Petropaulousk, which was translated into Russian language for me by a Russian who could speak and write English. The governor read the protest, and then signed my original in English.

On the 8th of August I went on board the cruiser to see the captain, but he refused to see me, and I was driven out of the ship. After I got ashore a detachment of marines was sent from the cruiser, and drove us all on board the American bark Majestic, then lying at anchor in Petropaulousk Harbor. She left on the following morning for Victoria, B. C., where we arrived August 30 at 2 o’clock p.m.

During the time we were prisoners at Petropaulousk we were only allowed 7 cents per day for our subsistence, the regular allowance to Russian prisoners, and provisions being high we could only obtain three biscuits, or half a pound of bread, which constituted our food each day. And I, in behalf of the owners of said schooner C. H. White, the crew and myself, do protest against said seizure of said vessel and the total confiscation of all our property by the said Russian cruiser Zabiaca and her commander, Deleveron, reserving to myself the right, on behalf of all parties concerned, to still further extend this protest if need be.

And the said appearers further declare that as all the damage and injury which already has or may hereafter appear to have happened or accrued to the said vessel, her freight, and cargo has been occasioned solely by the circumstances hereinbefore stated, and can not or ought not to be attributed to any insufficiency of the said vessel, the neglect or default of him, this deponent, his officers, or crew. He now requires me, the said notary, to make his protest and this public act thereof that the same may serve and be of full force and value, as of right shall appertain. And thereupon the said master protested, and I, the said notary, at his special instance and request, did, as by these presents I now do publicly and solemnly, protest against winds, weather, and seas, and against all and every accident, matter and thing, had and met with as aforesaid, whereby or by means whereof the said vessel, her freight, or her cargo already has or hereafter shall have suffered or sustained loss, damage, or injury, and for all losses, costs, charges, expenses, damages, and injury which the said vessel, or the owner and owners of the said vessel, or the owner or owners or shippers of her said cargo, or any other person or persons interested or concerned in it either, already have been or may hereafter be called upon to pay, sustain, incur, or be put unto, by or on account of the premises, or for which the insurer or insurers of the said vessel, her freight, or her cargo, is or are respectively liable to pay or make contributions or average according to custom, or their respective contract or [Page 244]obligations, so that no part of any losses, damages, injuries, or expenses already incurred Or hereafter to be incurred do fall on him, the said master, his officers, or crew.

Thus done and protested in Port Townsend this 1st day of September. A. D. 1892.

In testimony whereof, as well as the said appearers, I, the notary, have subscribed these presents, and I have also caused my seal of office to be hereunto affixed the day and year before written.

[seal.]
James G. Swan, Notary Public.

Signatures of appearers:
L. M. Furman, Master.
Andrews Romney, Mate.
Niels Wolfgang, Hunter.

State of Washington,
County of Jefferson, City of Port Townsend, ss:

I hereby certify the above and foregoing to be a true copy of protest against the capture of schooner C. H. White, of San Francisco, now on file in my office.

[seal.]
James G. Swan,
Notary Public, Washington, residing in Port Townsend.
[Page [Map 7]]

EXHIBIT L.

Chart T of the United States Coast Survey.

EXHIBIT M.

Your Excellency: I am directed by my Government to present to the Imperial Government the claims of the owners, master, mate, and hunter of the American schooner C. H. White, seized by the Russian cruiser Zabiaca on the 15th day of July, 1892. These claims are fully set forth in the inclosed copies of the following documents:

1.
A memorial of the Eagle Fishing Company, of San Francisco Cal., owners of the schooner C. H. White, complaining of the seizure of their vessel.
2.
A memorial of Lawrence M. Furman, master, complaining of his capture, imprisonment, and illtreatment by the Russian authorities at the time of the seizure and afterwards.
3.
A memorial of Andrew Ronning, mate, to the same effect.
4.
A memorial of Neils Wolfgang, hunter, to the same effect.

It appears that the schooner was owned by the Eagle Fishing Company, an American corporation, the shareholders of which were at the time of the seizure, and still are, American citizens. Indeed, all of the claimants and officers as well as all the white men of the crew, except Julias Furman, at the time of the seizure were, and still are, citizens of the United States.

The schooner regularly cleared from San Francisco May 7, 1892, bound on a fishing and hunting voyage to the North Pacific Ocean, having on board a fishing and hunting outfit and a crew of 10 white men and 4 Indians.

She took neither fish nor seals in Russian waters, nor does she seem to have ever visited Russian waters. Yet in latitude 54° 18’ N., longitude 167° 18’ E., a point more than 80 miles from Copper or Bering Islands, and of course even more remote from the mainland or any other Rssian island, she was on the 15th day of July, 1892, seized, as before stated, by the Russian war cruiser Zabiaca.

The officers and crew were treated as prisoners, and the schooner was towed by her captors to Bering Island. Thence she was sent in charge of a prize crew to Petropaulovsky, and her owners are informed that she is now in the possession and use of the Russian Government.

The protracted injustice and cruelty alleged by these men is recited in the inclosed memorials with harrowing particularity.

The master states that the Russian officers, presumably to cover up such transactions, compelled him in his helpless condition, and with the threat to send him to Siberia, to sign a paper in the Russian language, which he did not understand.

[Page 245]

My Government is very far from having any desire to protect from just punishment any of its citizens who enter the limits of another power and violate its laws. Nor do I imagine for a moment that the Imperial Government is without the most proper concern in regard to the conduct of its officers in those distant parts of the world. But here is a case where our citizens seem to have been engaged in a perfectly lawful pursuit, and under circumstances that do not touch in any degree the rights, interests, or jurisdiction of Russia. Every right, interest, and sentiment seems to have been totally disregarded.

Other memorials of this character, from the same quarter, have been presented by my Government; and I must ask your excellency to have this and similar cases pending made the subject of prompt and searching inquiry, to the end that such wrongs, if these allegations be true, may be prevented in the future, and that justice may be done for the past.

I avail myself of this occasion to renew to your excellency the assurance of my most distinguished consideration.

Clifton R. Breckinridge.

To His Excellency M. de Giers,
Imperial Minister of Foreign Affairs, etc.

I, Herbert H. D. Peirce, first secretary of the embassy of the United States of America, at St. Petersburg, Russia, do hereby certify that I have compared the foregoing copy of a note addressed to the Imperial Russian ministry of foreign affairs by the legation of the United States of America at St. Petersburg, Russia, dated December 26, 1894, with the original as entered in the archives of this embassy and now on file, and that the same is a correct transcription of the original as so entered and of the whole thereof.


[seal.]
Herbert H. D. Peirce,
First Secretary of Embassy.

EXHIBIT N.

Identical with Exhibit S, Cape Horn Pigeon.

EXHIBIT O.

Identical with Exhibit T, Cape Horn Pigeon.

EXHIBIT P.

Identical with Exhibit U, Cape Horn Pigeon.

EXHIBIT Q.

Identical with Exhibit C C, Cape Horn Pigeon.

EXHIBIT R.

Identical with Exhibit E E, Cape Horn Pigeon.

[Page 246]

EXHIBIT S.

Identical with Exhibit F F, Cape Horn Pigeon.

EXHIBIT T.

[In the matter of the seizure of the schooner C. H. White by the Russian Government.]

State of California, City and County of San Francisco, ss:

On this 20th day of November, 1900, before me, William T. Hess, a notary public in and for said city and county of San Francisco, State of California, duly commissioned and authorized by law to administer oaths in the said city, county, and State, and not interested in anywise in said claim, and not being the agent or attorney of any person interested in said claim, personally appeared Johan H. C. Prien, known to me to be a credible witness, and being first duly sworn, deposes and says:

I am the president of the Eagle Fishing Company, which said company owned the C. H. White in 1892, when she was seized by the Russian war cruiser Zabiaca, all of which will more fully appear by the memorial of said company on file herein.

The damage to said company for the loss of said vessel is placed by the said company in said memorial at the sum of $100,000, and is itemized as follows: Value of schooner C. H. White and outfit, $35,000; value of 20 sealskins which were seized, $280; value of 8 barrels of mackerel seized, $160; value of 1 ton of codfish seized, $260; value of probable catch of codfish and mackerel after the seizure of the vessel, $10,300; and probable value of catch of seals during the remainder of the sealing season, about $54,000; and I further say that the said sum of $100,000 will not reimburse said company fully for the seizure and loss of said vessel C. H. White.

I further state that said vessel C. H. White carried 7 hunting boats and a full equipment of hunters and sealers to man said boats.

Johan H. C. Prien.

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 20th day of November, 1900.

W. T. Hess,
Notary Public in and for the City and County of San Francisco, State of California.

[Seal of notary.]

State of California, City and County of San Francisco, ss:

I, Wm. A. Deane, county clerk of the city and county of San Francisco, State of California, and ex officio clerk of the superior court thereof (which court is a court of record, having a seal), do hereby certify that W. T. Hess, whose name is subscribed to the annexed instrument and thereon written, and before whom the annexed oath or affidavit was taken, was at the time of taking such oath or affidavit a notary public in and for the city and county of San Francisco, residing in said city and county, duly authorized to take the same, and an officer duly authorized by the laws of said State to take and certify the acknowledgment and proof of deeds to be recorded in said State. And further, that I am well acquainted with the handwriting of such officer, and verily believe that the signature to such jurat or certificate is genuine.


Wm. A. Deane, Clerk.

[Seal of the superior court.]

(10-cent stamp.)

11/23/1900.

W. A. D.

EXHIBIT U.

[In the matter of the seizure of the schooner C. H. White by the Russian Government.]

State of California, City and County of San Francisco, ss:

On this 20th day of November, 1900, before me, William T. Hess, a notary public in and for said city and county of San Francisco, State of California, duly commissioned [Page 247]and authorized by law to administer oaths in said city, county, and State, and not interested in anywise in said claim, personally appeared Andrew P. Lorentzen, personally known to me to be a credible witness, who, being first duly sworn, says:

My age is 62 years. I was born in Denmark. My residence is Alameda, Cal. I am now, and since 1865 have been, a duly naturalized citizen of the United States. My residence at the time the events took place in regard to which I am testifying and deposing was Alameda, Cal. My occupation is now, and was at the time the events took place in regard to which I am testifying and deposing, shipping merchant, but I, as then and prior thereto, and subsequently thereafter until now, have been managing owner and part owner of sealing vessels, and otherwise interested in the sealing business. I am not interested, either directly or indirectly, in the said claim, nor have I any contingent interest in the same. I am not the agent or attorney of the claimant making the above claim, nor of any person whatever interested therein. I will not be entitled to receive any part of any sum which may be awarded under said claim to said claimant. Since 1885, when I first became interested in the sealing business, I have been managing owner of the following vessels engaged in the sealing business, viz, the Mary H. Thomas, the Alexander, the Herman, and the Alton, and I am well acquainted with the value of sealing vessels and the outfits for the same. I knew the C. H White, her tonnage, and capacity well. I am advised as to her outfit and equipment. I knew L. M. Furman, the master thereof, and consider him a competent master, understanding the sealing business, and know that the master, outfit, equipment, and men of the C. H. White, in 1892, at the time she cleared from the port of San Francisco for the voyage during which she was seized by the Russian cruiser Zabiaca, were fully sufficient and competent for the purpose of sealing and fishing, and I know that the said C. H. White was fully fit for the purpose of sealing and fishing. I verily believe that the schooner C. H White, with its equipment and outfit, at the time it cleared from the port of San Francisco in 1892, when it was seized by the Russian war cruiser Zabiaca, was fully worth the sum of $35,000.

W. P. Lorentzen.

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 20th day of November, 1900.

[Seal of notary.]
W. T. Hess,
Notary Public in and for the City and County of San Francisco, State of California.

State of California, City and County of San Francisco, ss:

I, William A. Deane, county clerk of the city and county of San Francisco, State of California, and ex officio clerk of the superior court thereof (which court is a court of record, having a seal), do hereby certify that W. T. Hess, whose name is subscribed to the annexed instrument, and thereon written, and before whom the annexed oath or affidavit was taken, was, at the time of taking such oath or affidavit, a notary public in and for the city and county of San Francisco, residing in said city and county, duly authorized to take the same, and an officer duly authorized by the laws of said State to take and certify the acknowledgment and proofs of deeds to be recorded in said State. And further, that I am well acquainted with the handwriting of such officer, and verily believe that the signature to such jurat or certificate is genuine.


[Seal of the superior court.]
Wm. A. Deane, Clerk.

[10-cent stamp.]

11/23/1900.

W. A. D.

EXHIBIT V.

[In the matter of the seizure of the schooner C. H. White by the Russian Government.]

State of California, City and County of San Francisco, ss:

On this 19th day of November, 1900, before me, William T. Hess, a notary public in and for said city and county of San Francisco, State of California, duly commissioned and authorized by law to administer oaths in said city, county, and State, and not interested in anywise in said claim, and not being the agent or attorney of any [Page 248]person interested in said claim, personally appeared James Boyes, personally known to me to be a credible witness, who being first duly sworn, deposes and says:

My age is 46 years. I was born at Hull, England. I arrived in the city and county of San Francisco in 1870, and have been a duly naturalized citizen of the United States since 1876. My residence is now, and was at the time the events took place in regard to which I am testifying and deposing, No. 629 Broadway, San Francisco, Cal. My occupation is now wholesale shipping butcher; my occupation at the time the events took place In regard to which I am testifying and deposing was wholesale shipping butcher, but I was then and prior thereto and subsequently thereafter interested as managing owner of sealing vessels, and otherwise interested in the sealing business. I am not interested, either directly or indirectly, in the said claim, nor have I any contingent interest in the same. I am not the agent or attorney of the claimant making the above claim, nor of any person whatever interested therein. I will not be entitled to receive any part of any sum which may be awarded under said claim to said claimant.

I know the said schooner C. H. White well. The vessel was built in 1887 by C. H. White, a shipbuilder of San Francisco. She was then well worth the sum of $15,000, having cost that much to build. I, with William Bent and others, purchased the schooner C. H. White from the said builder in 1888, and we fitted her out for hunting seals at a total expense of $13,000. I was managing owner of the said schooner until 1891 or 1892, when we sold her to the Eagle Fishing Company, and I know that in the spring of 1892 the equipment was worth, for the purpose of sealing and fishing, all it cost us when new, $13,000, for we had kept up the equipment in as good a condition as new, and the schooner was then, in 1892, well worth what it had cost to build, $15,000; and I examined the said schooner C. H. White, and its outfit and equipment in 1892, just before she cleared for the voyage in the North Pacific Ocean, during which voyage she was seized by the Russian war cruiser Zabiaca; and I know her value, and also in a general way what the Eagle Fishing Company expended upon hera to fit her out and man her for said voyage; and her value for the purpose of sealing and fishing was not less than $35,000 at the time she was seized as aforesaid.

Jas. Boyes.

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 19th day of November, 1900.

[Seal of notary.]
W. T. Hess,
Notary Public in and for the City and County of San Francisco, State of California.

State of California, City and County of San Francisco, ss:

I, Wm. A. Deane, county clerk of the city and county of San Francisco, State of California, and ex officio clerk of the superior court thereof (which court is a court of record, having a seal), do hereby certify that W. T. Hess, whose name is subscribed to the annexed instrument and thereon written, and before whom the annexed oath or affidavit was taken, was, at the time of taking such oath or affidavit, a notary public in and for the city and county of San Francisco, residing in said city and county, duly authorized to take the same, and an officer duly authorized by the laws of said State to take and certify the acknowledgment and proof of deeds to be recorded in said State. And further, that I am well acquainted with the handwriting of such officer, and verily believe that the signature to such jurat or certificate is genuine.


[Seal of the superior court.]
Wm. A. Deane, Clerk.

[10-cent stamp.]

11/23/1900.

W. A. D.

EXHIBIT W.

[In the matter of the seizure of the schooner C. H. White by the Russian Government.]

State of California, City and County of San Francisco, ss:

On this 19th day of November, 1900, before me, William T. Hess, a notary public in and for said city and county of San Francisco, State of California, duly commissioned [Page 249]and authorized by law to administer oaths in said city, county, and State, and not interested in anywise in said claim, and not being the agent or attorney of any person interested in said claim, personally appeared, Charles Lutgens, sometimes called Claus Lutgens, personally known to me to be a credible witness, who being first duly sworn, deposes and says:

I am not interested either directly or indirectly in the said claim, nor have I any contingent interest in the same. I am not the agent or attorney of the claimant making the above claim, nor of any person interested therein. I will not be entitled to receive any part of any sum which may be awarded under said claim to said claimant. My age is 59 years; my place of birth was North Germany. I arrived in the city and county of San Francisco in 1869, and I have been a duly naturalized citizen of the United States since about 1875. I have been a sailor or seaman for 38 years, and have been a master mariner since 1872. I am now a master mariner. At the time the events took place in regard to which I am now testifying and deposing I was a master mariner, and master and owner of the American schooner Kate and Anna, and am now the owner thereof. My residence is now at Alameda, Cal., and my residence at the time the events took place in relation to which I am testifying and deposing was San Francisco, Cal. During the season of 1892, I was sealing and hunting in the North Pacific Ocean as owner and master of said schooner Kate and Anna. I have been in the sealing business since 1886; I was master and owner of said schooner Kate and Anna until 1896, and since 1896 up to the present time, I am the owner of said schooner Kate and Anna and am engaged in the sealing business. I am well acquainted with the schooner C. H. White. I saw her in the year 1890, and I saw the said schooner in 1892 at the time it cleared for the voyage during which it was seized by the Russian cruiser Zabiaca. I was informed as to the date of the seizure of said schooner C. H. White on July 15, 1892. I know the master of said schooner, L. M. Furman, to have been a competent master, understanding the sealing business, and I know the equipment of the vessel to have been sufficient for the purpose of sealing and fishing. I was sealing in the North Pacific Ocean during the year 1892 as master and owner of the schooner Kate and Anna, and am fully able to judge as to the probable number of seals which ‘the said schooner C. H. White would reasonably be expected to catch during the season of 1892 after its seizure as aforesaid. I know the value of the seal skins in the London market during the year 1892 to have been $14 each, because I sold 1,252 seal skins that year at that price. I estimated that the probable catch of the schooner C. H. White for the season of 1892, subsequent to its seizure on July 15th, 1892, would have been at least 2,400 seal skins, worth as aforesaid $14 each, and the probable and reasonable value thereof would have been $33,600.

Charles Lutjens.

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 19th day of November, 1900.

W. T. Hess,
Notary Public in and for the City and County of San Francisco, State of California.
[Seal of notary.]

State of California, City and County of San Francisco, ss:

I, Wm. A. Deane, county clerk of the city and county of San Francisco, State of California, and ex officio clerk of the superior court thereof (which court is a court of record having a seal), do hereby certify that W. T. Hess, whose name is subscribed to the annexed instrument and thereon written, and before whom the annexed oath or affidavit was taken, was, at the time of taking such oath or affidavit, a notary public in and for the city and county of San Francisco, residing in said city and county, duly authorized to take the same, and an officer duly authorized by the laws of said State to take and certify the acknowledgment and proof of deeds to be recorded in said State, And further, that I am well acquainted with the handwriting of such officer, and verily believe that the signature to such jurat or certificate is genuine.


[Seal of the superior court.]
Wm. A. Deane, Clerk.

[10-cent stamp.]

11/23/1900.

W. A. D.

[Page 250]

EXHIBIT X.

[Cat. No. 335.—Register No. 23: Permanent. Official number: Numerals, 126,500; letters.]

Copy of certificate of registry.

In pursuance of Chapter 1, Title XLVIII, “Regulation of commerce and navigation,” Revised Statutes of the United States, John H. C. Prien, of San Francisco, Cal., president, having taken and subscribed the oath required by law, and having sworn that the Eagle Fishing Company, a corporation duly organized under the laws of the State of California, is the only owner of the vessel called the C. H. White, of San Francisco, whereof Lawrence M. Furman is at present master, and is a citizen of the United States; and that the said vessel was built in the year 1888 at San Francisco, Cal., as appears by permanent register No. 77, issued at this port January 11, 1890, now surrendered new owner; and said register having certified that the said vessel has one deck and two masts, and that her length is 86 and 8 tenths feet, her breadth 23 feet and 10 tenths, her depth 9 feet and 5 tenths, her height feet and tenths; that she measures 84 tons and 45 hundredths, viz.:

Tons.
Capacity under tonnage deck 82.44
Capacity between decks above tonnage deck
Capacity of inclosures on the upper deck, viz 6.45
Gross tonnage 88.89
Deductions under section 4153, Revised Statutes, as amended by act of August 5, 1882 4.44
Total deductions 4.44 4.44
Net tonnage 84.45

The following described spaces, and no others, have been omitted, viz:

and that she is a schooner, has a billet head and an elliptic stern; and the said Johan H. C. Prien having agreed to the description and admeasurement above specified, and sufficient security having been given according to law, said vessel has been duly registered at the port of San Francisco.


[Place for seal of naval officer.]
E. P. Danforth, Naval Officer.

[Place for seal of collector.]
T. G. Phelps, Collector of Customs.

[Seal of the United States Treasury.]
Wm. W. Bates,
Commissioner of Navigation.

EXHIBIT Y.

[In the matter of the claim of Lars M. Furman against the Russian Government.]

State of California, City and County of San Francisco, ss:

W. H. Grodt, being duly sworn, deposes and says: I was born in the year 1850. I have been a citizen of the United States for about fourteen years. I reside at No. 9 Essex street, San Francisco, Cal. I am by occupation a stevedore. I have known Lars M. Furman, who makes claim against the Russian Government under the name of Lawrence M. Furman, from childhood. We played together as boys in Sweden. I have known him since his arrival in this country. He was always called Lars M. Furman in Sweden. I know that his true name is Lars M. Furman, and I know him to be the same person who makes claim against the Russian Government under the name of Lawrence M. Furman.

I have no interest of any kind or nature whatsoever in said claim, nor am I the agent or attorney of said claimant.

W. H. Grodt.

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 10th day of April, 1894.

[seal.]
John C. Hughes,
Notary Public in and for the City and County of San Francisco,
State of California, Booms 4 and 5, Fourth Floor,
Mills Building, San Francisco, Cal.
[Page 251]

EXHIBIT Y.

[In the matter of the claim of Lars M. Furman against the Russian Government.]

State of California, City and County of San Francisco, ss:

I, M. C. Haley, county clerk of the city and county of San Francisco, State of California, and ex officio clerk of the superior court thereof (which court is a court of record, having a seal) do hereby certify—

That John C. Hughes, whose name is subscribed to the annexed instrument and thereon written, and before whom the annexed oath or affidavit was taken, was, at the time of taking such oath or affidavit, a notary public in and for the city and county of San Francisco, residing in said city and county, duly authorized to take the same, and an officer duly authorized by the laws of said State to take and certify the acknowledgment and proof of deeds to be recorded in said State. And further, that I am well acquainted with the handwriting of such officer, and verily believe that the signature to such jurat or certificate is genuine.


[seal.]
M. C. Haley, Clerk.

EXHIBIT Z.

Minor.]

Certified copy of act of naturalization.—No. 823.

In the superior court of the city and county of San Francisco, State of California. Present: Hon. D. J. Toohy, judge.

[In the matter of the application of Andrew Olson, an alien, to become a citizen of the United States of America.]

In open court, department No. 11, this 5th day of March, A. D. 1898.

It appearing to the satisfaction of this court by the oaths of George Anderson and F. H. Hagenah, citizens of the United States of America, witnesses for that purpose, first duly sworn and examined, that Andrew Olson, a native of Norway, resided in the United States of America three years next preceding his arriving at the age of 21 years, and that he has continued to reside in the United States to the present time, and has resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States five years at least last past, and within the State of California for one year last past, and that during all said five years’ time he has behaved as a man of good moral character, attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States and well disposed to the good order and happiness of the same, and the said applicant has declared his intention to become a citizen of the United States, and having now here before this court taken an oath that he will support the Constitution of the United States of America, and that he doth absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to every foreign prince, potentate, state, and sovereignty whatever, and particularly to the King of Norway and Sweden, it is therefore ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the said Andrew Olson be, and is hereby, admitted and declared to be a citizen of the United States of America.

D. J. Toohy, Judge.
Andrew Olson, Residence. No. 1 Jackson street
.
Witnesses:
George Anderson, No 9 Jackson Street.

F. H. Hagenah, No. 100½ Jackson Street.

Office of the Clerk of the Superior Court,
City and County of San Francisco, State of California, ss:

I, Wm. J. Ruddick, county clerk and ex officio clerk of the superior court, in and for the city and county of San Francisco, State of California, said court being a court of record, having common law jurisdiction, and a clerk and seal, do certify that the above is a true copy of the act of naturalization of Andrew Olson, as the same appears upon the records of said court now in my office.


(Stamped)
Wm. J. Ruddick, Clerk.

[seal.] By
Bert M. Nulty, Deputy Clerk.
[Page 252]

EXHIBIT A A.

[In the matter of the claim of Andrew Olson against the Russian Government.]

Andrew Olson, also known as Andrew Ronning, being duly sworn, deposes and says: I was born in Norway in the year 1853. I have been a citizen of the United States since March 5, 1883. I reside at No. 10 Jackson street, San Francisco, Cal.; I am by occupation a seafaring man. I am the same person who makes claim against the Russian Government under the name of Andrew Ronning. My father’s name was Ole Andreason Ronning, and in accordance with the custom of the country in which I was born, to wit, Norway, I was christened Andrew Olson. I was sometimes called Andrew Ronning in Norway. After I came to San Francisco, and subsequent to receiving my naturalization papers, I found a great many people by the name of Olson in the seafaring business, and in order to avoid confusion, and finding it to be the custom in the United States for the son to take the last name of his father as his own last name, I used the name of Andrew Ronning and shipped on the vessel C. H. White under the said name of Andrew Ronning, and for the same reason I used the name of Andrew Ronning in making my claim against the Russian Government.

I furthermore depose and say that there is no other reason for the change of my name than as above stated.

Andrew Olson.

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 10th day of April, 1894.

John C. Hughes,
Notary Public in and for the City and County of San Francisco, State of California, Rooms 4 and 5, Fourth Floor, Mills Building, San Francisco, Cal.

[In the matter of the claim of Andrew Olson against the Russian Government (Andrew Olson also known as Andrew Ronning.)]

State of California, City and County of San Francisco, ss:

I, M. C. Haley, county clerk of the city and county of San Francisco, State of California, and ex officio clerk of the superior court thereof (which court is a court of record, having a seal), do hereby certify that John C. Hughes, whose name is subscribed to the annexed instruments and thereon written, and before whom the annexed oaths or affidavits were taken, was, at the time of taking such oaths or affidavits a notary public in and for the city and county of San Francisco, residing in said city and county, duly authorized to take the same, and an officer duly authorized by the laws of said State to take and certify the acknowledgment and proof of deeds to be recorded in said State; and further that I am well acquainted with the handwriting of such officer and verily believe that the signatures to such jurats or certificates are genuine.


[seal.]
M. C. Haley, Clerk.

EXHIBIT B B.

[In the matter of the claim of Andrew Olson against the Russian Government.]

State of California, City and County of San Francisco, ss:

Martin Olsen, being duly sworn, deposes and says: I was born in Norway in the year 1858. I have been a citizen of the United States since the year 1892. I reside at No. 1½ Cedar avenue, San Francisco, Cal. I am by occupation a seafaring man. I have known Andrew Olson for the last twenty years. I knew him in Norway. His father’s name was Ole Andreason Ronning. I am familiar with the custom of Norway in regard to patronymics. It is the custom in Norway to give the child the last name Olson where the father’s first name is Ole. I know him to be the person who makes claim against the Russian Government under the name of Andrew Ronning, and I also know him to be the same person who was naturalized in the [Page 253]superior court of the city and county of San Francisco, State of California, March 5, 1888.

I have no interest of any kind or nature whatsoever in said claim, nor am I the agent or attorney of said claimant.

Martin Olsen.

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 10th day of April, 1894.

[seal.]
John C. Hughes
,
Notary Public in and for the City and County of San Francisco, State of California, Rooms 4 and 5, Fourth Floor, Mills Building, San Francisco, Cal.

EXHIBIT C C.

[In the matter of the claim of Andrew Olson against the Russian Government.]

State of California, City and County of San Francisco, ss:

Theodor Tonnessen, being duly sworn, deposes and says: I was born in Norway in the year 1855. I have been a citizen of the United States since the year 1890. I reside at 29½ Fourteenth street, San Francisco, Cal. I am by occupation a seafaring man. I have known Andrew Olsen from childhood in Norway, and in this country since I arrived here. I know his father. His father’s name was Ole Andreason Ronning, and while he was usually called Andrew Olsen in Norway, yet I have heard him called Andrew Ronning there. I am familiar with the custom of Norway in regard to patronymics. It is a custom in Norway to give the child the last name Olson where father’s first name is Ole. I have heard him generally called Andrew Olson in Norway, although at times they have called him in my presence Andrew Ronning. I know him to be the same person who makes claim against the Russian Government under the name of Andrew Ronning, and I also know him to be the same person who was naturalized in the superior court of the city and county of San Francisco, State of California, March 5, 1888.

I have no interest of any kind or nature whatsoever in said claim, nor am I the agent or attorney of said claimant.

Theodor Tonnessen.

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 10th day of April, 1894.

[seal.]
John C. Hughes
,
Notary Public in and for the City and County of San Francisco, State of California, Rooms 4 and 5, Fourth Floor, Mills Building, San Francisco, Cal.

EXHIBIT D D.

Identical with Exhibit D D, Cape Horn Pigeon.

  1. The word “here” has been corrected to read “her,” as above noted.—W. T. Hess.