The Sun.
London, England, 1817-11-15 00:00:00

AMERICAN FISHING VESSELS.

MONTREAL, OCT. 4.,--We copy the following
Decree of the Court of Vice-Admiralty from the
ilalifur Free Press: it is a decision In favour of
the American fishing-vessels detained there in
June last, which were on the 29th ult. restored to
their owners, upon payment of costs

Decree pronounced by the Honourable MICHAEL WALLACE,
Jnitge of the Vice-Adiniralty Court, on Friday, the 29th
ult. in the cage of Ameri'ean fishing-vessels, seized and de-
tained by his Msjesty's ships of war, in the harbours and
on the coasts of Nova-Scotia.

This is a question of great national importance.
Under that impression, it has had as much Con..
sideration on my part, as my humble talents are
capable of giving it. •

1 entirety accede to the principle laid down by
the Advocare•General, that the American Govern-
ment, When it commenced hostilities against
Great Britain, cnt the cord on which their• treaty
of 1783 with our Government hung, and thereby
dissolved. every condition, obligation, and privi-
lege it contained, But as American subjects have
long enjoyed under that,treaty, the privilege of
fishing on our coast, and there being to specific
notification front our Government that I know of
since the treaty of Ghent published on the subject
for me to have recourse to, I cannot adopt so
serious a n►ea•ure as the condemnation of the pro-
perty of individuals who seem generally igno-
rant of the intentions of our Government with
respect to •the prohibition : besides, it does not
appear to the Court that any of them were found
in the act of catching fish, or trading with -the
inhabitants in any of our bays or Imat'bonrs, but
merely seeking shelter front the/ weather, or a
little fresh, water, which, under existing circum-
stances, I cannot view in the light of an infringe-
ment of our rights.
Independent of this consideration, were I in-
clined to enforce the principle of national law
against the claimants in this case, I should be at
a loss what penalty to pronounce upon time
aggressors. - _

!m all other cases in which foreigners are seized
for unlawful traffic, there are positive Acts of Par-
liament inflicting a forfeiture of the property and
other penalties for the offence.
Is it a matter of course in this instance, that
these vessels are to be condetnned and forfeited to
'his •Majesty cannot think so.
•I have no law to guide mein my judgment, no
Proclamation or Orders of Council, no instructions
'of any kind. by which I can measure the punish-
ment to be inflicted for this infringement of our
'colonial rights.
It is totally a new question, and one that I con-
ceive to be involved in much doubt and difficulty,
in consequence, of the silence of the Treaty of
Ghent on this very:important subject.
-I am not ignorant that negocia-tions have been
carried on respecting the fishery in question, be-
tween our Government and that of America :
those nego'ciations were broken off in January
last, if is true !.--but it is equally true, that they
have been renewed and are still pending.
Under such circumstances, therefore, I. do not
consider myself justified in condemning this, pro-
perty to his Majesty ; but shall decree the vessels
and property belonging to them to be restored to
the claimaists on paying costs : from which de-
cree, if the seizers are dissatisfied, 'they are at
liberty to appeal to a superior Court, where it is
probable the subject has been under the discussion
of able minds, and where the intentions of our
Government t'vith respect "to it can be fully ascer-
tained.