R., 1264, line 40.

Capt. Alexander McLean gave his opinion that the market value of the Ada in Victoria in 1887 was about $6,500, from which must be deducted the wear and tear for a full season, having been seized August 25.

The United States claim that, for the vessels seized and condemned, owned by persons in whose behalf Great Britain is entitled to claim compensation from the United States, they are liable to pay the market value of such vessels at the port of Victoria at the time of their seizure.

PERSONAL CLAIMS OF CAPTAINS AND MATES.

The personal claims submitted by the Convention of February 8, 1896, to this High Commission are the claims submitted to the Tribunal of Arbitration at Paris, between pages 1 to 60, inclusive, of the case of Great Britain as filed before that Tribunal: These claims are:

No other claims for personal damages were submitted to this High Commission by the Convention, and no sum can be awarded to any claimant whose claim is not set out and included in the schedule above given.

The United States took this position early in these proceedings, and moved the High Commission to dismiss from consideration the personal claim of James Gaudin, for the reason that it was not embraced in the schedule of the British case, between pages 1 to 60, as presented to the Tribunal of Arbitration at Paris; was not referred to in article 9 of the award of that tribunal; was not embraced in the Convention between the United States and Great Britain, of February, 1896; that it did not arise by virtue of the treaty of 1892, or of the award and findings of the Tribunal of Arbitration at Paris; and is not an additional claim specified in the fifth paragraph of the preamble to the Convention of 1896.

All personal claims other than those named in the above schedule must be dismissed from the consideration of the High Commissioners, and no damages can be awarded the claimants.

The schedule discloses that no claim was made before the Tribunal of Arbitration at Paris for damages arising from the illegal arrest and imprisonment of the mate of the Grace.

A claim is made for damages suffered by the mate of the Grace in the schedule of the claim of that vessel in the British Argument. This claim undoubtedly was made by error. The testimony did not establish that there was any mate of the Grace at Sitka who was treated by the authorities of the United States as the mate, and there is no evidence that he was detained at Sitka under the same conditions as the other captains and mates.

All claims for the sufferings and hardships of the members of the crews of the various vessels which are not specified in the table taken from the British case, as presented to the Tribunal of Arbitration at Paris, are personal claims, and by the terms of the Convention are excluded from the consideration and jurisdiction of this High Commission. Under all

international commissions required to find the amount of damages for each person, the claimants, members of the crews of various vessels, have been uniformly required to present claims for damages and sufferings separately; and unless such claims were presented, their consideration has been held to be beyond the jurisdiction of the Commission. The personal claims made on behalf of the members of the crews of various vessels in the British Argument for the first time were not presented to the Tribunal of Arbitration at Paris, and no such claims were ever presented to the United States.

The claims set out in the schedule above, which were presented to the Tribunal of Arbitration at Paris, are all for damages arising by reason of "illegal arrest and imprisonment," and "sufferings and losses," with the exception of the claim of Captain Warren, master of the Dolphin, "navigating four vessels from Unalaska to Sitka."

Counsel for Great Britain stated:

66.

What I want to refer to is this: The personal claims that R., 1201, linə were especially placed before the Paris Tribunal for 1886 and 1887 stand on a different basis altogether. In 1886 all the captains were actually arrested, convicted, and imprisoned, and for that they put a claim in, and you may have noticed that we have been particular not to go into the details of what the captains lost in the way of wages, but to claim under the general loss of the venture. The claims were put in for illegal arrest and imprisonment of the captains and for such an amount as this court, acting in the place of a jury, if you will, would give to a person illegally arrested and imprisoned. The same with the cases of 1887, where the personal liberty of the captain and mate was to a certain extent interfered with. The amount and extent is a matter of degree, but we put that forward on a different basis altogether, and it has always been so done. We have not attempted in this case to bolster up or enlarge the case of any particular captain on account of loss of wages, or anything of that kind.

From the nature of the claims made at Paris, and the statement of counsel, these claims are to be considered by the High Commissioners as claims for

R., 1146, line

28.

damages arising by reason of the alleged illegal arrest and imprisonment of the captains and mates of the schooners seized in the years 1886 and 1887.

A

The testimony establishes that in the year 1886 a charge was made against the captains and mates for violation of the municipal laws of the United States, prohibiting the taking of fur seals in the waters of Bering Sea. After reaching Sitka the testimony conclusively establishes that the men were never restrained of their liberty, except that they were compelled to remain in Sitka; that they could go and come as they chose, and that, as a matter of fact, the men did have complete control of their own movements in Sitka. They were brought before the court and sentenced, but prior to the sentence they were not restrained in any place under lock and key. guard was never placed over them, and they were never, at any time, in jail. One of the jury rooms in the court-house at Sitka was set aside for their use. This room was large and comfortable. They were provided with food regularly by the marshal, and could, during the day and during the night, if they so wished, occupy themselves about Sitka at their own will. After the sentence of the court they were restrained of their liberty by being compelled to remain in Sitka. They could go out of the room provided for them at any time they desired; no guard was placed over them, and the room in which they remained throughout the day and in which they slept at night was never locked against their exit.

In the year 1887 no formal charge was ever preferred against the masters and mates. They were never detained or restrained in any way, save that they were compelled to stay in Sitka until the 9th day of September, when Capt. James D. Warren says:

Q. September 9 we were all called in and released, and are getting ready to go to Victoria [reading from a book]. Is that correct?