CO885-(11-13) — Page 151

MY LORD,

No. 815.

(GAMBIA.)

LAW OFFICERS to COLONIAL OFFICE.

Temple, August 16, 1873. We are honoured with your Lordship's commands, signified in Mr. Holland's letter of the 25th July 1873, stating that he was directed by your Lordship to trans- mit to us a copy of a Despatch No. 5, of the 23rd June ultimo, from the Administrator of the Gambia, and of the enclosures thereto relating to the seizure by the Custom House officials of the British barque "Arabistan," and also copy of a letter of the 12th July, from Mr. Quin, the owner of that vessel, and of the enclosures thereto.

2. That it would be seen that Mr. Quin disputed the legality of the seizure of his vessel, and submitted a claim for 250l.: 1st, for detention of the vessel; 2nd, for damage sustained to it when it was in charge of the Custom House officers; and 3rd, for the amount of the expenses incurred by him in defending the ship.

3rd. That with reference to the first item of claim, viz., detention of the ship, it would be seen that the Court had decided that the seizure was illegal and not war- ranted by the Gambia Customs' Ordinance, a copy of which was enclosed for our information.

4. That that judgment of a competent Court had not been appealed against, and it was apprehended, therefore, that, in considering Mr. Quin's claim it must be assumed that the seizure was illegal.

That the question of fact, whether there was a breach of the Customs' Ordinance, had not been tried, and although Mr. Quin, rests his case upon this point, upon the evidence of the master, mate, and carpenter, who were examined under the Commission to avoid the necessity of their being detained in the Colony, yet it would be observed, by referring to the statements of Mr. Lewis, Mr. Davis, and Morgan (the boatman), which would be found in the enclosures to the Administrator's Despatch, that there was a distinct contradiction as to several material points.

5. That Mr. Quin alleged that Mr. Fowler took the proceedings from vindictive motives; but there is nothing to support this view, except Mr. Quin's own statement, and assuming such statement to be correct, and capable of proof, it would appear from Mr. Cohen's opinion that Mr. Quin might proceed against Mr. Fowler, who was then in this country, for damages arising from malicious seizure of the vessel.

6. In these circumstances it was suggested that this part of the case might be laid out of consideration, and that two questions remained.

First, whether Mr. Quin has any equitable claim for compensation from the Colonial Government for the wrongful seizure of the vessel; and-

Secondly. If we should be of opinion that he has any equitable claim, what reason- able amount of compensation he should receive.

7. Upon the first point Mr. Holland was pleased to say that he was to direct our attention to the judgment of the Court, and reason given by the judge for refusing

Mr. Quin his costs, namely, that by neglecting to make the entry he had brought the seizure on himself.

8. Upon the second question he was to observe—

1. That the vessel was only actually in the hands of the Custom House officers

from the 1st to the 8th of March.

2. That Mr. Quin claims for a longer detention of the vessel on the ground that damage done to it while in the possession of the Custom House officers had to be made good; but it would be seen that there was no account how the damage was done, and that the master and crew were on board the vessel during the seven days' detention.

In conclusion, Mr. Holland stated that he was to request that we would take the papers into consideration and advise your Lordship upon the question above referred

to.

In obedience to your Lordship's commands we have the honour to

Report

That in our opinion Mr. Quin has no claim, equitable or otherwise, for compensation from the Colonial Government for the seizure of his vessel.

0

16278.-860.

25.-5/86.

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

C.O. 885

11

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO