311.4153 H 39/47
The British Chargé ( Chilton ) to the Secretary of State
Sir: I have the honour to inform you that my attention has been drawn to certain comments in the press regarding the recent decision of the United States Circuit Court of Appeal in connection with the condemnation and forfeiture of the alleged British schooner Henry L. Marshall 20b for smuggling liquor into the United States in contravention of the prohibition laws. You will recollect that this vessel was seized by United States Revenue Officials in July 1921 when [Page 164] off the coast of New Jersey and outside the limit of United States territorial waters.
The general trend of these comments is to the effect that the view of many American legal experts that the United States Government has the right to seize rum-runners outside the three-mile limit is shared by the State Department, and it is hinted that the absence of a protest by His Majesty’s Government against the condemnation of the Henry L. Marshall by the United States Circuit Court of Appeal not only makes the case a useful precedent for similar future action by the United States authorities outside the three-mile limit against British vessels suspected of rum-running, but also implies a change in the attitude of His Majesty’s Government towards the principle of such seizures outside the three-mile limit.
In order to avoid the possibility of any misunderstanding on the part of the United States Government as to His Majesty’s Government’s attitude in this matter I have the honour, under instructions from His Majesty’s Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, to inform you that any attempt on the part of the United States authorities to seize a British ship outside the three-mile limit would be regarded by His Majesty’s Government as creating a very serious situation. In regard to the Henry L. Marshall case, I have been instructed to explain that the absence of a protest by His Majesty’s Government against the condemnation of this vessel in no way implies any alteration in the views of His Majesty’s Government with regard to the principle at stake, inasmuch as that vessel, owing to the circumstances in which she secured her British registry, was not recognized by His Majesty’s Government as entitled to British registry. Consequently, His Majesty’s Government have not felt called upon to assert the principle at stake on her behalf, since, as far as His Majesty’s Government are concerned, the Henry L. Marshall remains an American vessel.
I have [etc.]
- 292 Fed. 486.↩