The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1891-07-22
THE ST ANDREws BAY SEIZURES.
The Question Involved In Them 10 One or
Facts and Not OF New Theories.

The Question Involved In Them 10 One or
Facts and Not or New Theories.
WASHINGTON. July 21.-The capture OF sew
eral American fishing boats By the Dominion
cruiser Dream OF the Fishery Protection Ser.
vice has caused n little furry OF excitement In
q summer which till now has been unusually
quiet along the shores Of New brunswick and
Nova Scotia.
The incident. however. is obviously only q
new example under an old principle, and does
not raise any question not already familiar.
Congressman Boutelle In telegraphing to
Washington for Immediate action by tho State
Departmentto protect the rights Of our people,
suggested that 1t locks like IN attsmpt to an
noy aud harass Americans at time when the
Maine coast is most thronGed with pleasure
seekers from all parts Of the country" But
the facts hardly indicate any deliberate timing
OF the seizures to the season ut Bar Harbor
and Names other charming watering places,
and the coincidence thus pointed out seems to
be accidental and without logical connection.
New Bruins wick and Nova Scotia have their
own share OF summer boarders from the
States. ind on that score might lose rather
than gain by stirring up our American eaGle In
mid-July.
The simpler explanation seems to be that
since tho line between Maine and New Bruins
wick at the coast is a water boundary, with
PASSPORT very close to it, fishing craft from
that enterprising American town are some-
times liable. in eagerly pursuing their calling.
to stray across into British waters. There. II
caught fishing by the cruiser stationed for the
purpose. they are undoubtedly liable to DO ar.
rested. rs fishermen from Ut. Andrews might
10 fined at Eastport for violating any OF our
customs regulations. In the case of the boats
seized bv the Dream. the only point In contro-
versy is that. as is not unusual in such cases.
their crews insist that they were not fishing in
British waters. and for that reason claim the
protection of our Government. Should the
evidence adduced show that tho Dream was
wrong In her reading of tho boundary marks
aud in her idea of the position OF our boats.
they will have to he Released. and any flies that
may lie exnctcd will have to be RENTED. Tho
crews. as appears from the testimony OF Dep
utv Collector Mutt, were landed ut Eastport
but the boats were towed to st. Andrews.
The occasional recurrence OF these troubles
at PASSPORT is further due to the fact that 1t 10
the seat OF fourishinR herring or sardine
hacking nustriess e; and for TIE purchase Of
can boats used To- resort e CANADIAN waters.
Five years .g3 II }HIy 1885, The Domnion
that hnrbor that were waiting for The Canada
sd me- Iny sS there
the first summer after the expiration OF the
treaty OF Washington and tho sardlne pack
ers OF Eastport were very Indignant at being
in iormeu that the return to the treaty of 1918
would prevent their fishing boats from exer-
cising In British ports the commercial Irivi-
leges previously accorded. The following
year three boats from Enatport belonging to
the sa dine hackers were seized by the Domin-
ion ruiser Intrepid Tor violation o! the Cana
dian customs laws. AT another time two fish
ing schooners. the Jeannstte and tho Maggie
Mitchell. were also sell ed in the bay and lined
$50 and 500 respectively.
After these experiences It became evident
that the forms OF the treaty Of 1915 which
were enforced uron he vessels engaged in the
piled to the fishing boats that had been in the
habit OF procuring herring by purchase Or
.tnerwI,e from the British waters of 81.
Andrews Lay. Very little trouble has accord
ingly since occurred in that region until that
OF last week. The present seizures do not in
dictate any attempt On the Dart OF the Dominion
auth rites to enforce new rules. or to put
new interpretations upon old ones Since tt Q
crews OF the boats res. thor claims for rrote.-
tion on thu assertion that they were fishing on
the Amer. can side Gf the line. the inference is
that they recognize that fishing on the Brit tsh
side would lie unlawful II lhev can esta bish
a reasonable doubt rs to their having gone
into the prohibited waters. probably n" fine
will hs eyacted. In any case. the issue is
plainly one OF TACT. an not u novel element in
the fishery controversy. which Inns now for
several years rested quietly under the oper
alton OF tho .moduS rirendi license system.