the twofold ground (as we understand his letters) that she was not provided with proper legal papers and that they had violated the Chinese Passenger Act. I. Stirling declined to comply, observing that he had no authority to seize and detain a ship for violating the Chinese Passenger Act, such ship not being a "British ship" and not within "Her Majesty's Jurisdictions". The question proposed by him was whether I. & Stirling were covering in appearing that although
38 although the ship in question "carried no national colours" and was "a matter of violating a Law, no whatever nation", he "was not justified in seizing her on the St. Lawrence".
5. It is obvious that this question, taken in reference to the case which gave rise to it, involves two points which are entirely distinct, viz., first, whether a deficiency or irregularity in a ship's papers renders her liable to seizure, and under circumstances in which another vessel whose papers are regular would not be.