THE CASE OF THE GAZELLE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XX, Issue 6824, 1 October 1883, Page 5

THE CASE OF THE GAZELLE.

o Me. Hill, Collector of Customs, has represented to us that the main circumstances of the seizing of the Gazelle appear . Id have become forgotten, owing to the lapse of time since that event took place. At his desire, we repeat the several eveutj in the natural order. On the arrival of the vessel, the captain gave the usual notice to the Customs, as to the stores, &c, he had on board, including ■ tobacco and other dutiable goods. On being ( asked if his statement was a correct, ful!, and true one, the usual declaration was made in the affirmative. The Customs authorities, of course, had to accept the statement thus subscribed. Nothing further took place until about twelve days after her arrival when the . Customs launch had to go to Motuihi. That vessel did not return from the Quarantine Station until the dusk of the evening. On the tide-waiter stepping on to the wharf he noticed the captain of the Gazelle stepping on shore with a heavy bundle under his arm. The tide-waiter followed the captain up, and finding that the parcel contained about twelve pounds of American manufactured tobacco, he suspected tbat more might be on board, and askec. the captain to return on board. He did so, and on the cabin being searched two boxes of Sydney made tobacco, containing about 401bs. each, were found under the captain's bunk, and a bundle also of Sydney manufactured tobacco was found in the captain's box. Both captain and vessel were seized according to law, which provides that when the captain or owner of any vessel is detected in smuggling the vessel is liable to seizure. The seizure of the vessel does not take place when any officer on the vessel, other than the captain or owner, is caught in the act of smuggling. In due time the captain was brought up at the Police Court and fined £100, which was paid. When the correspondei.ee wa» opened np with the owner, the Government stated that the vessel might be restored by the payment of a fine of £50 and giving the usual guarantee, or engagement, required in such canes, that the business had .closed and the case terminated. This the owner refused to do, and the Government have in consequence retained possession of the vessel. The fine of £50 on the owner was imposed as a caution or warning to owners that great care must be exercised in the selection of captains, who, owing to their position, are the agents or representatives of the owner, as any act of smuggling on the part of such captain renders the vessel liable to forfeiture.