[Inclosure.]
Certified copy of a report of a committee of the
honorable the privy council, approved by his excellency the
governor-general in council on the 9th September,
1887.
The committee of the privy council have had under consideration a
dispatch, dated June 23, 1887, from Her Majesty’s minister at
Washington transmitting a statement of Messrs. S. H. Davis &
Co., of Detroit, Mich., relative to the seizure of their property by
Canadian officials in Canadian territory, and requesting that
inquiry be made into the matter.
The minister of marine and fisheries, to whom the matter was
referred, reports the circumstances under which the seizures
complained of were made, as follows:
It having come to the knowledge of the officers of the fisheries
department in Juno last that a large number of nets were being
illegally set in the Georgian Bay by two fishermen named,
respectively, McLean and Lincoln (the former a British and the
latter an American subject) an official was sent to ascertain the
facts. Upon his arrival it was found that fishing was being carried
on in a most extensive manner, and
[Page 770]
that neither of the parties engaged therein
had a license from the department of marine and fisheries.
The minister states that although interim receipts appear to have
been issued by-Fishery Overseer James, purporting to cover the cost
of a license for six boats, very conflicting statements are made as
to the conditions under which these receipts were given by the
overseer.
This phase of the case is, however, unimportant, as upon inspection
of the nets in use, and in which the seized fish were taken, it was
ascertained that the mesh in every net was of illegal size; neither
is the fact essential, though a reference thereto should not be
omitted, as throwing some light on the extent of the illegal
proceedings, resulting in the seizure of the fish purchased by the
Messrs. Davis, that nearly 70 miles or over 122,000 yards of these
illegal nets were in use, being at least 87,000 yards in excess of
the quantity the six boats would have been entitled to use under a
license from the department of fisheries.
The minister observes that subsection 3 of section 10, cap. 95 of the
Revised Statutes of Canada provides as follows:
“Gill-nets for catchiug salmon trout or white fish shall have meshes
of at least 5 inches, extension measure.” Subsection 3 of section 18
of the act referred to further provides that “all materials,
implements, or appliances used, and all fish taken or killed in
violation of this act or any regulation under it, snail be
confiscated to Her Majesty, and may be seized and confiscated on
view by any fishery officer, or taken and removed by any person for
delivery to any justice of the peace, and the proceeds arising from
the disposal thereof may be applied towards defraying expenses under
this act.”
The claim therefore of Messrs. Davis & Co. that the fish, having
been bought and paid for by them, should not have been seized, is
clearly untenable.
The minister remarks that if it be admitted that fish illegally
caught, but disposed of to a second party, are exempt from seizure,
the law would become inoperative and incapable of effectual
enforcement. In this case Messrs. Davis & Co.’s complaint should
be directed against the parties who sold them the fish which had
been illegally caught and not against the department of fisheries,
which simply enforced the laws of the country in the interest of one
of its industries deserving the most careful protection.
The minister further observes that the question of citizenship was
not raised or considered by his officers in this matter, nor has any
prejudice existed against Messrs. Davis & Co. on account of
their nationality.
The law has been enforced altogether irrespective of any
considerations as to the individuals interested. Citizens of the
United States trading in Canada have a well-defined status, with
perfect freedom to transact business in all legal commodities, of
which legally-caught fish is one, and the minister is not aware, in
the action under consideration, of having permitted in the least
degree any infringement of that status.
The minister deems it unnecessary to refer to the alleged threat of
seizure on the part of Canadian officers of the steamer Remora, as no such seizure was made, and if
the vessel was, as it is presumed she was, legally within her right
in being at French River for the purpose of taking on board the
fish, no improper detention would have been permitted.
The fish cars to which Messrs. Davis & Co.’s claim refers, being
no part of the apparatus used in taking the confiscated fish, the
officer of the fisheries department at Victoria Harbor was
instructed on the 9th of July last to return them to the agent of
the Messrs. Davis, at French River.
The committee concurring in the report of the ministry of marine and
fisheries advise that your excellency be moved to transmit a copy of
this minute to Her Majesty’s minister at Washington.
All which is respectfully submitted for your excellency’s
approval.
John J.
McGee,
Clerk Privy
Council.
