ing to be constables, one of which had constable's badge. At that time the captain told the constables that they had no right to come aboard of his steamer to collect the wages of any of his crew without first obtaining permission from the Norwegian consul. The constable replied that he had the necessary papers, and that he must either pay the seamen's wages or they should take him into custody. The captainsthen refused to either pay or go with them. The constable then applied the twistert to his left wrist, one pulling and the other pushing him to the rail nearest to he wharf. At this time the captain replied that rather than be disgraced he would pay the money.

The constables then went below in the cabin with the captain, still keeping the twisters on him. I followed them into the cabin. At that time there was considerable excitement and a number of people present, and I was obliged to stand by the cabin door to keep them from entering the said cabin. The next that I heard was the captain explaining to the constables and exhibiting the two seamen's accounts, and that the money was ready for them, although he had not promised to pay them until 5 o'clock that day, it then being only 4 o'clock. At no time during the struggle on deck did I see the captain break away from the constables and grasp the vessel's rigging or any of its parts, so that it was necessary for him to break his hold while clinging to any part of the vessel. The captain informed the constables that he did not object to paying the money at the time appointed by him, but did object to their coming on board of his vessel in violation of the existing treaty between his country and the United States.

C. MCINNIS, a Police Officer of Boston.

BOSTON, August 5, 1892.

COMMONWEALTH of MassacHUSETTS, Suffolk, 88: Then personally appeared the above-named Charles D. McInnis who made oath to the foregoing statement, which he carefully read and to which he subscribed before me. ISSAC 8. MULLEN, Justice of the Peace.

EXHIBIT F.

SAMUEL NELSON, by occupation a carpenter, residing at 14 Ray street, Boston, Mass., being duly sworn, said:

That on the 16th day of July, in the afternoon of said day, I was down below on board the Norwegian steamer Albert, commanded by Captain Tellefsen, said steamer hailing from Bergen, Norway, and, hearing a disturbance on the upper deck, I went on deck and saw Captain Tellefsen with parties claiming to be constables. The larger of the constables grasped the captain by his shirt collar while he was standing near the starboard rail of said steamer. The captain grasped the rigging, and then the assistant constable struck the captain to break his hold. Being unable to break his hold, he was obliged to use both hands to break the said hold. Then both of the constables dragged him toward the pier. When opposite the companion way of the cabin he (the captain) grasped the said companion way, and the assistant constable used great force to again break the captain's hold. In doing so the captain's hand was frightfully lacerated. They then dragged him to the port side next to the pier, the constable putting the twisters on just before he broke the hold of the captain from the companion way, and was twisted up tightly, so that I saw the marks on the captain's wrist the next day.

As they had him on the port side one of the crew whom the captain owed wages to, by name of J. G. Hurbert, said to the captain, "You had better settle this matter and avoid any trouble." The constable then asked the captain, "What are you going to do? Are you going to pay?" The captain then asked, "What are you going to do with me?" The constable replied, "I am going to take you to jail unless you pay." The captain answered, "Let me go and I will pay you anything to avoid disgrace." They then started for the cabin, the twisters still upon the captain's wrists. I did not see anything more until after the constables had left the ship. I started to enter the cabin and I saw the captain sitting on the sofa and the mate doing up his (the captain's) hand. When the captain saw me he threw up his hands and exclaimed, in a very excited manner, "There they are coming again." He then fainted, falling into the mate's arms. I again went on board the ship and called upon the captain, and when I saw him his hand was bandaged as the result from the disturbance on the 16th day of July. During the disturbance the captain several times said to the constables, "What right have you to go aboard a Norwegian vessel

and arrest anyone? You know what ship you are on board?" The constable replied, "I have a writ for your arrest. I am a constable, and I know my business."

SAMUEL NELSON.

BOSTON, August 5, 1892.

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, Suffolk, 88:
Then personally appeared the above-named Samuel Nelson, who made oath to the
foregoing statement, which he carefully read and to which he subscribed before me.
ISAAC S. MULLEN, Justice of the Peace.

EXHIBIT G.
[Translation.]

Settlement with Seaman Nils Johannesen for services on board S. S. Albert, Capt. B. Tellefsen, of Bergen.

Wages from June 11 to July 15 included, 1 month and 4 days, at $25............................. 28.33 B. TELLEFSEN. SWEDISH AND Norwegian VICE-CONSULATE, Boston, August 4, 1892.

I certify that the above is a correct translation from the original in the Norwegian language. [SEAL.]

GIERT LOOTZ, Consul.

EXHIBIT H.

BOSTON, July 16, 1892.

Received of Capt. Tellefsen the sum of thirty-three and 75-100 dollars in settlement of suit of Johnson vs. Tellefsen.

PETER P. FEE, Constable.

BOSTON, August 4, 1892.

I certify the above to be a true copy of the original now on file in the office of the Norwegian consul. ISAAC S. MULLEN, Justice of the Peace.

I, the undersigned, Nels Johannesen, hereby acknowledges that I have this day received of Capt. B. Tellefsen twenty-two dollars, being balance of wages due me for services as seaman on board S. S. Albert, of Bergen, and declare that I have no further claim against the steamer, captain, or owners.

Mr. Foster to Governor Russell.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

Washington, August 20, 1892.

SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your excellency's letter of the 13th instant, communicating, in response to my request of

July 23, 1892, a report of the investigation made under the direction of the chief of district police force of your State in the matter of the arrest in Boston on July 18, 1892, of Captain Tellefsen, of the Norwe gian steamer Albert, contrary to the provisions of the existing treaty of 1827, between the United States and Sweden and Norway.

My letter of July 23, after setting forth the right of the Government of Sweden and Norway to expect due reparation for the infringement of its treaty in this important regard, requested the ascertainment of the facts in order to determine the measure of responsibility, if any, in the present case, and to enable me to make a satisfactory reply to the complaint of the representative of Sweden and Norway.

Your excellency's reply being confined to the simple narrative of the facts of the case, does not deal with the question of responsibility for the wrong to the Government of Sweden and Norway which, as appears from your report, has been committed in the present case by a civil officer under the jurisdiction of the city of Boston, in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and, therefore, while admitting the facts upon which the complaint is founded, does not enable us to make a satisfactory reply to the representations of the chargé d'affaires of Sweden and Norway.

I consequently have the honor to request of your excellency a statement of the steps which have been taken or are proposed to be taken by the responsible authorities to make due reparation for the infringement of Article XIII of the treaty of 1827 between the United States and Sweden and Norway, and to testify disapprobation of the offense by visiting punishment or signal displeasure on the agents who have committed it.

I of course understand that such executive expressions of regret and measures of reparation as may be properly forthcoming are internationally effective only as between the Governments of the United States and Sweden and Norway, leaving unimpaired the rights of the injured party to such redress as the laws may afford.

I return herewith the original papers that accompanied your letter, copies of the same having been retained for the Department's files. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant,

JOHN W. FOSTER.

Governor Russell to Mr. Foster.

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS,
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT,
Boston, September 7, 1892.

DEAR SIR: In further answer to your letters in reference to the case of Capt. B. Tellefsen, master of the Norwegian steamer Albert, and especially in further answer to your letter of July 18, in which you ask for a statement of the "steps which have been taken or are proposed to be taken by the responsible authorities to make due reparation," etc., I desire to say that I have referred all the correspondence, together with the affidavits, papers, etc., to the attorney general of this Commonwealth for his opinion as to what can properly and legally be done by this Commonwealth in the direction suggested.

He has since reported to me that there is no law of Massachusetts providing for reparation or indemnity in such a case, and that he has not been able to learn of any like case which will serve as a precedent.

The constable who made the arrest complained of is a civil officer under the control of the city of Boston, and the executive authority of the Commonwealth has no power over his appointment or removal. Under our laws neither the State nor the city of Boston is legally liable for the misconduct of a constable, but the courts of Massachusetts are open for action by Captain Tellefsen for damages against the constable and any others concerned in issuing or serving the writ.

I desire to add that I have called the attention of the mayor of the city of Boston to the case, in order that the city might take such action on its part by way of reprimand or removal of the officer, or make such other reparation as it deemed proper.

As, after investigation and consultation with the Attorney-General, I am advised that the conduct of the constable in this case seems to have been highly improper, while the Commonwealth is not responsible for his act, I desire to express the sincere regret of the authorities of the Commonwealth at this occurrence.

Very respectfully, yours,

WM. E. RUSSELL, Governor.

Mr. Foster to Governor Russell.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

Washington, September 15, 1892.

SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 7th instant in further relation to the case of Capt. B. Tellefsen, of the Norwegian steamer Albert.

It will afford me much pleasure to communicate to the Swedish and Norwegian chargé d'affaires the conclusion reached by your excellency as to the high impropriety of the conduct of the constable in the arrest of Captain Tellefsen, and the expression you convey of the sincere regret of the authorities of the Commonwealth at the occurrence. I notice that your reply is limited, so far as concerns reparation for the wrong committed, to the question of legal liability for the misconduct of the constable. The reported facts show that, in contravention of an express provision of treaty, this shipmaster has been subjected to the process of the courts, and fees and costs exacted of him improperly.

Whatever be the view taken in regard to actual damages or exemplary indemnification, the restitution of the charges imposed upon Captain Tellefsen would seem to be a matter disconnected from that of legal liability for damages. Your excellency's reply does not afford me the means of making answer to any expression of the just expectation of the Swedish and Norwegian Government, that restriction shall be made in this regard.

I further note your statement that "the constable who made the arrest complained of is a civil officer under the control of the city of Boston, and the executive authority of the Commonwealth has no power over his appointment or removal." I am directed by the President to express his hope and desire that the matter may be relegated to the municipal authorities of the city of Boston, to the end that such action may be taken in the exercise of their competent authority over the offender as will suitably punish or rebuke his highly improper conduct and insure the return of the unduly exacted fees and costs, besides tending to prevent the recurrence of such regrettable infractions of international obligations.

I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant,
S. Doc. 4-2
JOHN W. FOSTER.

Governor Russell to Mr. Foster.

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS,
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT,

Boston, September 19, 1892.

DEAR SIR: I have received your letter of September 15, and in accordance with its request have referred it to the municipal authorities of the city of Boston for their consideration and action.

Very respectfully,

WM. E. RUSSELL, Governor.

Mr. Grip to Mr. Gresham.

LEGATION OF SWEDEN AND Norway,

Washington, April 28, 1894.

MR. SECRETARY OF STATE: In a memorandum, dated July 23, 1892, Baron Beck-Friis, chargé d'affaires of Sweden and Norway, had the honor to inform his excellency, Mr. Foster, of the arrest, on the 16th of that month, at the port of Boston, of B. Tellefsen, master of the Norwegian vessel Albert.

It was thought that the arrest, based on a warrant issued by a Boston court, was in violation of the stipulations of Article XIII of the treaty of commerce and navigation of July 4, 1827, between Sweden and Norway and the United States, respecting the exclusive consular jurisdiction in the cases of dispute between the masters and crews of the vessels of either nation.

His excellency, Mr. Foster, kindly promised to cause such measures to be taken as were required in the premises, and on the following 7th of September verbally informed the undersigned that no satisfactory answer had yet been received from the governor of the State of Massachusetts, to whom the matter had been referred, but that he expected to receive one before long. Yet this legation is still without any communication referring to the occurrence.

In the meanwhile the master of the vessel in question lodged a complaint (took out a warrant) against the police officer who had been ordered to effect the arrest, the master's opinion being that the arrest was unlawful and that the officer's proceedings had been more violent than the circumstances required. The case was tried on the 8th of February last, and the officer was acquitted by the jury.

However, the judge who conducted the proceedings prejudged the question of jurisdiction in charging the jury, as well as that of the lawfulness of the arrest itself.

Your excellency will be pleased to notice, in the stenographic report of the charge which I have the honor to inclose herewith, pages 4 and 5, the following statement of the judge:

And the plaintiff's case is put in part upon the proposition in the outset that the municipal court had no authority to order the arrest of the defendant under the circumstances disclosed in the case, he being a foreigner and being upon the deck of the vessel of which he was in command and under the Norwegian flag. That is a question of law and one upon which the court has passed and you are not concerned in it, the court having ruled that the defendant was not without the jurisdiction of the municipal court of the city of Boston and it was competent to issue process to serve upon him, either by attachment of his goods or by the arrest of his person. So yon will proceed upon the assumption that the municipal court had full authority to issue the process.