CO885-(13-15) — Page 350

REVISE.

1963.

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

TPELLC.O.885

سائس سياسيا

14 FUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

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

MY LORD,

No. 50.

(NEWFOUNDLAND.)

LAW OFFICERS to FOREIGN OFFICE.

Law Officers' Department, Royal Courts of Justice, We were honoured with your Lordship's commands signified in Mr. Bertie's

January 18, 1894. letter of the lat January stating that he was directed by your Lordship to transmit to us the papers relating to the claim of Messrs. Oakes and Foster, citizens of the United States, on account of the illegal seizure of their fishing schooner the Holbrook" by the Colonial authorities of Newfoundland.

"Howard

That previous correspondence on this matter had been referred to our predecessors, and reported on by them on the 17th of March 1892.

That upon receipt of their Report the Governor of Newfoundland was informed that the Law Officers of the Crown had advised that the action of the Newfoundland authorities did entitle the owners and master of the "Howard Holbrook" to compen- sation, and he was requested again to bring the case before his Ministers and urge upon them the desirability of admitting the liability of the Government of Newfound- land to make reasonable compensation, the amount of which might be left to be. arranged diplomatically between Her Majesty's Government and the Government of the United States.

That Sir Terence O'Brien was further asked to furnish Her Majesty's Government with any criticisms which his Ministers might have to offer on the claim presented by Messrs. Oakes and Foster, and also with a statement of the amount which they would consider, in all the circumstances, adequate compensation for the loss sustained by the owners, and for the imprisonment of the master.

That after considerable delay a reply was received from the Government of New- foundland forwarding an extract from a letter from the Attorney-General of the Colony to the effect that he adhered to the opinion he had already given as to the non- liability of the Government of Newfoundland for the claim preferred against them, and calling in question the damages alleged to have been sustained.

That to this letter your Lordship had taken very strong objection on the grounds explained in a letter to the Colonial Office on the 17th of December last.

That two despatches were accordingly addressed on the subject to the Governor of Newfoundland by the Secretary of State for the Colonies, of which copies were inclosed. That in a letter from the Colonial Office, dated February 25th, 1893, further explanations received from the Attorney-General of the Colony of Newfoundland in regard to the opinions he had expressed would be found,

That on the 20th of May the Colonial Office had forwarded to the Foreign Office a despatch received from the Governor of Newfoundland inclosing a Report made by Judge Prowse at the request of the Attorney-General of that Colony.

That in his report Judge Prowse refuted the statements made in the case and showed reason for reducing the claim of the owners of the compensation, which he considered should only be paid, if at all, under protest.

"Howard Holbrook" for

That the facts which had thus come to light and to which attention had been particularly drawn in Judge Prowse's detailed Report, appeared to present certain portions of the case in an aspect somewhat different from that which it bore when originally submitted to our predecessors, though it might be doubted whether the new matter contained in these more recent papers would have caused them to modify the substance of their Report of March 17th, 1892, or would lead us to dissent from its general tenour.

That it appeared to your Lordship, as at present advised, that the judgment of the Stipendiary Magistrate of which the claimants complained was very probably erroneous, on grounds other and entirely distinct from those mentioned in the decision of the Court of Appeal reversing his judgment, and that therefore it might not be necessary to consider with any very great minuteness the strictures, whether ill or well founded, which had been offered by Judge Prowse on that decision.

That at the same time there was no reason to doubt that the action of the Stipen- diary Magistrate with reference to the case was perfectly bona fide, and under those circumstances it would seem that as matter of strict law, the decision of the Court of

o 79871,-8. 25.-2/94.

-