CO885-(13-15) — Page 419

12425.

No. 88.

(JAMAICA.)

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

TLC.O. 885

لسائل اليا

14 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

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

GENTLEMEN,

FOREIGN OFFICE to the LAW OFFICERS.

Foreign Office, June 4, 1895. I HAVE the honour, by direction of the Earl of Kimberley, to transmit to you the papers noted on the accompanying list, which relate to the claims made on the Government of Haïti by the owner, the master, and two members of the crew of the schooner "May Reed."

The papers in the case do not include any statement showing the view taken of it by the Haïtian authorities, beyond the record of the trial of the master and the two seamen before the Court of First Instance at Cap Haïtien (see Document C.); but a report on the case has now been received from Her Majesty's Consul-General in Haïti (see Document C. 2, Mr. Tweedy's No. 8), which puts a somewhat different complexion on the occurrence. The information contained in the statements made by the master and the seamen (see Documents H. and M.) is, however, confirmed by other statements (see Documents C. and A.) sent home from Jamaica.

The facts of the case appear to be shortly as follows:—

The " May Reed

was a British ship of 12.71 tons, owned by Mr. C. R. Hinson (see Documents D. and G.), and she arrived at Cap Haïtien on the 8th August last; on the 18th of that month (see Documents H. and M.) the master and two of the crew were arrested on a charge of smuggling; they were tried on the 25th October (see Document B.); no witnesses were called, but the Court, relying, as would seem, on the Customs documents showing that the articles alleged to have been smuggled had been duly declared, and on a letter from the Chief Financial Adminis- trator of the district stating that the Customs officials had taken due cognizance of the articles in question three days before the men were arrested, acquitted the prisoners. An appeal was lodged against this decision; the grounds of the appeal do not appear, neither is it clear that the appeal was ever heard. On the 30th January last (or, according to the seamen on the 29th), after the men had been in prison 166 days, they were told that they were free (see Document H.).

In the meantime, the remaining members of the crew being unable to manage the schooner, and having no resources, had returned home, and the vessel had gone to the bottom of the sea (see Documents E. and H.).

The men state (see Documents H. and M.) that they were confined in a cell some 12 feet square, absolutely unprovided with any sanitary arrangements whatsoever, and that there were frequently as many as twenty-two other prsioners in it. There were neither beds nor bedding. They were constantly short of water, and had to rely on the kindness of friends for their food, Medical assistance was refused to them, although the two seamen suffered from fever, and the master from fever, diarrhœa, and dysentery:

The cell in which the men were confined is described (see Documents C. and A.) by other persons as "extremely close and filthy," "a miserable dirty place," and one of the persons in question stated he would not go back to see the men on account of the vermin.

It will be observed that, according to the statement made by the master the men were offered their liberty if they would ask for pardon and renounce all claim to com- pensation (see Document H.).

The papers contain a certificate by a Government medical officer of Grand Turk (see Document K.) as to the extent to which the master's health suffered by the treatment to which he was subjected, and it is presumable, and is also said by them to hiave been the case (see Document M.) that the seamen suffered much in health. The med.cal officer states that the master will certainly never be able to resume his calling as a shipmaster.

p $5965,--14. 25.-7/95.

2