36982
We have, &c.,
R. B. FINLAY. EDWARD CARSON.
MY LORD,
No. 56.
(NEWFOUNDLAND.)
LAW OFFICERS to FOREIGN OFFICE.
Royal Courts of Justice, October 31, 1900. WE were honoured with Your Lordship's commands, signified in Sir Martin Gosse- l's letter of the 20th instant, stating that he was directed by Your Lordship to transit to us the papers noted in the accompanying list relative to the claim of Mon- sieur St. Mieux, of St. Malo, to compensation on account of the destruction of his lobster factory on St. John's Island, Newfoundland.
That the factory was, in March, 1899, burned by a half-witted inhabitant of Bonne Bay, Newfoundland, named Ingram Andrew Taylor, who, in September of the same year, was, on account of that act, tried for arson, pleaded guilty, and was sentenced to twelve months' imprisonment with hard labour and other penalties; that accounts of the preliminary proceedings before the Magistrate (Paper A), and of the trial before the Supreme Court of Newfoundland (Paper C), were among the papers.
That in the following November the French Ambassador enquired privately whether there was any likelihood of compensation being made to M. St. Mleux for the destruction of his property by which he had been a heavy loser. That the matter was referred to the Colonial Office, who, in their reply (l'aper ̊C), stated that the Newfound- land Government had, in anticipation, repudiated all responsibility for the incident.
That they at the same time called attention to the fact that, according to the ancient practice of the fishery, to which the French were bound to conform, the fishery buildings were abandoned at the end of each fishery season, and were open to the occupation of whoever might, from priority of arrival, have the right of selecting them for the following season.
That, apart therefore from the consideration that the responsibility of the Govern- ment in regard to the act of a private incendiary was limited to the prompt execution of the provisions of the criminal law, it did not appear that Her Majesty's Government could recognise that M. St. Mleux had any proprietary interest in the factory which would justify the payment of compensation.
That, as it was not thought desirable at that time to raise wider issues, M. Cambon was merely informed verbally that the Colony disclaimed all responsibility or liability, and a copy of the proceedings before the Supreme Court was given to him. That, on the 1st August, His Excellency communicated a memorandum (Paper D) setting forth the ground on which M. St. Mleux based his claim, in which special re- liance was placed upon the obligation of the Newfoundland authorities, under the Inter- national instrument affecting the Treaty Shore, to protect from injury the scaffoldings of the French fishermen during their absence and upon the terms of the Modus Vivendi, by which it was claimed the lobster factories must be assimilated to those scaffoldings.
That the obligation alluded to was presumably that contained in the third graph of the Declaration of King George III. (Paper G), which was made at the time
of the signature of the Treaty of Versailles in 1783.
para-
That the Modus Vivendi (Paper F) was an arrangement come to with France for the temporary regulation during the season of 1890 of the Newfoundland lobster fishery, and it had since that year annually been renewed for each successive fishery season.
That the Colonial Office, to whom M. Cambon's memorandum was referred, had replied (Paper E) that, for the reasons already stated in their previous letter, they were unable to admit that M. St. Mieux had any well founded claim for compensation. That Your Lordship was disposed to think that, in view of the Modus Vivendi, it could hardly be argued that M. St. Mleux had no proprietary rights in the factory burned by Taylor. That, on the other hand, there was apparently no evidence of negligence on the part of the Newfoundland authorities which would render the Colony liable to pay compensation, and it seemed most undesirable to admit that, irre- spective of negligence, Her Majesty's Government were responsible for any damage that might be done to French lobster factories on the Treaty Shore during the winter. That the Secretary of State for the Colonies, however (Paper H), as at present advised, was still inclined to think that the obligations imposed by the Declaration of Versailles was an obligation to the Government of France and not to individual French fishermen, and, as regards the Modus Vivendi, did not perceive how that arrangement,
193-28-11 1900 Wt 321 D&S 5
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
C.O. 885
Reference :-
-15 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO