Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1891-08-07
81 IELEGMPh.


wAsHrxsroH, Aug. THE case Of ths
echooner r. B.. Marvin. now IN Der homo
ran IL vicspeia, il likely - bking up some
vssy intsseseina points relating . The mo-
dus vivendi agreement and IL execution.
Bob the naval and the customs authofi-
ties seem 70 be exce edipgly causious ahons
tskiue she vessel into custody, although
she vss oroefed home for the par
pose. Il viii be remembered that
While q Sand Point Outside Of
Behripa Sea, she vas warned BY an
American government vessel not to enter
that sea, sod . copy Of President Hafrison's
proclamation Vas served upon her. Never
taeIess on the 9Th OF Jaly she pushed into
the forbidden waters, but vas overhanltd
the next day BY the vigilant Rush, which
seized her and cruised with her until ths
fell in With the British var ship Nymphe,
TO whose custody shs vas intrussed Com
msndef Turner Of that vessel told her TO
report under arrest TO the Collector OF
victoria This she did, bat che found the
collector BY no means anxious TO held her
Accordir to the accounts, ihe collector
said be hsd no orders to proceed against the
vessel, and that while her log book showed
that she vas TO report to him, that did not
seem 10 BIN SUIT Gent authority for taking
fu,the action sesinst her. Admiral Hot
ham, commanding the squadron to which
the Nymphe belongs. had more posiuve
views of the collectors responsibility IN
the matter, but was at the same time
anxious MOTTO assume any on his own part.
The suggestion occurs that perhaps the ex-
perience Of the British naval ofiicer Who
last yesr attempted to enforce the New
fouudlsnd modus vivsndi by shutting up
the lobster factories may have made other
British officials timid. As Capt Walker
found himself the subject Of . lswsuit,
which was decided against him. 30 the
officials in the British Columbian port msy
have an image before tbs IN Of damages for
keeping the E B. Marvin under restraint
without authority.
Fortunately the sssling schooner mani
fesrs not the slightest dispHition to taxi
advantage of his dilemma by trying to es-
cape. In fact, her owners are prepared TO
contest any legal process for her confscs-
lion or other punishment; and this ietto-
duces another curious point The ground
taken by the Marvin il. that 10 tn. copy ef
,he proclamation served upon her, there
was an error 10 the alleged signature OF the
British Minister. TIE names signed to The
orisinsl document are Wiiiism +. Wharton
and Julian Psuncefo te. Some OF the sc-
counts have declsred that Sir Julian was
rs-chris;ened Willism in this document.
Whether the error was rs gross NJ that re-
mains to be seen; bu. it is incopceivable
that suth q defence would be ffe-ed unless
=. L.. - 81 hot hsau commit
ted In the haste with which the copies of
the proclamation were rushed through for
distribution, they apparently were not
properly revised.
The Marvin. therefore, will claim that
she had the right, under such circumstances,
to refuse to be bound by warning whose
text nigh, be Is faulty as the alleged sigma
lures. and that she was entitled to 90 o.
until q British war vessel should serve 3
proper notice upon her. She will say that
the object Of her entering Behring eea was
to tiod out whether the alleged agreemen.
had actually received the signature of the
British minister, or whether this had not
been put on prematurelv and without au-
thority and hence misspelled. 10
IL will be interesting to see whether this
plea will hold qood. But perhaps the Mar
vim msy also contend that even with no de-
feet in the signature, che was not bound BY
the notice. The agreement in question
says that Great Britain sBd the United
States 'swill prohibit seal killing in speci,
fed part of Behting sea. and then adds thai
vessels or persons offending against this
prohibition may be seized by the naval OF
other officers Of either nation. But it does
not say that the mere presence Of
q vessel in Behijng SEA is sn offence and
nothing yet showsthat the Marvin killed
any seals there The Presidents procla
nation 10 expressly said t, be made in or
der that the agreement may be fulfilled
by The United States of Ameries and the
citizens thereof" thus suR gestinz possibly
that like proclamation from other sources
might be expected by Brit, h citizens. The
Marvin may perhaps claim that without be-
ing served with q copy of an order in coun'
Gil or some similar documAnt from British
authorities she could not determine exactly
what the latter would permit or prohibit in
interpreting the argument. Such are some
Of the curious points suggested at the out
set by the seizure Of the Victoria vessel.