The Sun.
London, England, 1822-07-31 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

This day the House sat by Commission.—The SPEAKER
informed the House that the Royal Assent had been given to
several public and private Bills (for which see the Lords).
Mr. BROGDEN brought up the. Report of the Exchequer
Bills Bill. _ _ _

Militia •
The
a Pay Bill was read a third time and passed.-
IRISH TITHES LEASING BILL.
The CHANCELLOR, of the _EXCHEQUER having
moved the third reading of this Bill,
Colonel TRENCH said, that he' had on'a forther occasion
been represented to say, that the distress of the county of
.Mayo was at an end. What he had said was, that that distress
had been much abated, and would be still more abated by the
crop of potatoes which would fall in a few weeks; but the in-
terval was one of the most fearful and anxious kind. There
were no less than 360,000 persons in the county of Mayo alone
who were receiving relief. The Hon. Gentleman in conclusion
warmly praised the conduct of the Executive Government, as
well as the British Public, by the charitable exertions of whom
the miseries of the population of Ireland were in a great meal
sure averted.

Sir W. DE CRESPIGNY hoped, that the causes of dis-
tress would be considered by the Irish Government ' • he was
not overfriendly to the system of Poors' Rates, but if nothing
more effectual could be done, he hoped the Poore Rate would
be introduced. .

Mr: Secretary GOULBURN. bore testimony. to the public-
spirited and disinterested exertions of the Members of the
Dublin Commission.
. _

Mt. IDIE took that opportunity of correcting a statement
which appeared in an Irish Paper. lie had been made to say,
that he objected to, the appointment of Mr. Plunkett, on the
ground ofhis deficiency in point of professional attainments; he
had never used the words; he objected to the extreme youth,
and consequent want of experience of that Gentleman, not to
his want of professional attainments.
Mr. WE'IIHERELL corroborated the statement of the Ho-
nourable Gentleman.

Tl;e Bill was then read a third time, and passed.
ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE.

The Marquis of LONDONDERRY gave notice, that he
would on, to-morrow move the Adjournment of the House till
Monday next.
. TH t• CASE OF THOMAS FLANAGAN.

Lord A. HAMILTON called the attention of the Right
lion. Secretary opposite, to the Petition of a person named
Flanagan, .then lying on the table, stating that a Judge in Ire-
land had taken upon himself to acquit a prisoner charged with
felony, although the Jury had convicted (Lord H.)
thought this circumstance ought to be explained.
Mr. GOULBURN stated, that he had been tried and con-
victed in Ireland; for having stolen a number of tenpenny tokens
that the case was afterwards submitted to Judge Mayne, before
wliom he was tried, and that that Learned Judge gave it as his
opinion, that the evidence justified the verdic4,--that the Jury
acted rightly in returping a verdict ofguilty,and`that the culprit
was not an object to whom mercy ought to have been extended.
Mr. R. MARTIN said, it was possible that Mr. Flanagan
might tell the truth ; but certainly, his general character was
such as to render him unworthy of credit.—The conversation
here dropped.
SCOTCH BURGHS.

Lord A. HAMILTON, after some prefatory observations,
moved for a Return, stating the Names and Residences of the
Town Council of The Royal Burghs; but after a few words
.from the Marquis of LONDONDERRY, he postponed the mo-
tion until to-morrow.

Dr. P HILLIMORE presented a Petition from a Publican
of Berkshire, against the present Licensing System.—Ordered
to lie on the table.
BRITISH COMMERCE.—PIRATES.

Mr. MARRYATT rose to present a Petition from certain
Merchants and Ship-owners of the City of London, complaining .
that the British shipping was not sufficiently protected in the
South Sea. The Honourable Member requested the attention
of the House to this important subject. It appeared that the
Governnfents of Chili and Peru :were at present at variance,
and each had declared the .coast of its enemy in a state of
blockade. The vessels of Great Britain were thus placed be-
tween two fires, and the consequence was•that many of them
had been captured by each of the hostile parties. The books at
Lloyd's exhibited numerous proofs of the depredations which
were now committed upon British commerce. One case had been
before alluded to in that House—he meant that of the Lord Col.,
livwood vessel, which had been captured and condemned at
Porto Rico. The causes assigned for this proceeding were,
that the vessel was trading in the South Seas without a license,
from the Government of Spain, and moreover that it was car-
rying on trade with the enemies of that Government. Another
great source of injury to British commerce was, the pirates who
Infested those Seas. The Hon. Member read a description of
the treatment :which a British vessel had received from a pira-
tical cruiser. After stripping the vessel of everything valu-
able, and making the Captain delivet all his money, the pirate
cut and destroyed all the rigging and left her: The pirate,
however, afterwards returned and demanded more money from
the Captain, who, .not being able to furnish them with it, was
dreadfully wounded by. their cutlasses, and afterwards hung up
to,n parrof the rigging by a rope tied round his neck ; but
his hands being left at liberty, he contrived to slip the knot
under his chin, and thus saved his life. Others of the British
crew experienced similar treatment. s This was a sample of the
treatment which our unfortunate seamen received from these
Gentlemen.—(Hear.)—He was sorry to say that he understood
no attempt was made by the British vessels of war to destroy
these pirates in their strong holds, which were perfectly
well known to our cruisers. , The Americians only showed
-a disposition to put down the pirates. In many instances
the Americans had captured British vessels which had
been previously taken by pirates, and restored them to
their owners. It would seem, however, that this country
was actuated; by a different .policy. The English schooner
Despatch having. been captured by a pirate, and afterwards re-
taken by a Spanish vessels application nuts made to Rear-Ad-
miral Brown to have the schooner restored to its original owners.
In answer to this application, Admiral. Brown stated that he
was authorized by his Commander-in-Chief to declare that
Great Britain could not interfere to obtain restitution of vessels
(although originally British) which had been captured whilst

sailing under a piratical flag. This was in direct oppoSition to
the policy-puraued by America, who acted uporiethe princiqe—
that Piraty and Murder. could give no title to property. Thee .
doctrine of Rear Admiral Brown appeared to be 'this--that
vessels captured under a piratical flag became the property of -
those by whom they 'ivere-taken.. , But how would this apply toe
the case of British vessels captured by pirates, and retaken by
AdMiral Brown himself ?—(llear !)—Was it meant to be con-
tended that vessels taken under these circumstances should- be-
long to Admiral Brown ?: The Hon. Gentleman then pro-
ceeded to complain, that British vessels of war refused to take.
under convoy the vessels of any other country than this ; whilst
the Americans gave public notice that they would give convoy
to vessels of all nations without distinction of flags. In war
there might be reasons,for refusing to take under our convoy,
but he could imagine no pretext for doing so now. • He men-
tioned this circumstance only because inferences unfavourable
to the British flag were drawn from it, whilst at the' same time
the conduct of America was referred to and eulogized .in all
parts of the world.—(Hear, hear !)—The Hon. Member con-
cluded with moving that the Petition be brought up.—(Dear!)
Sir 0. COCKBURN felt it necessary to make a few observa-
tions upon what had fallen from the'lion. Member. The Hon.
Member had not correctly stated the case when he said that
America made it a practice to. restore vessels retaken from
pirates to their original owners. In the instances in which
America had restored vessels, they. had just before been taken
by the pirates. There was this difference in the case Itif the
schooner. Dispatch, which the -Hon. Member had alluded to—
namely, that 'Chad been acting as a pirate before it was cap-
tured by the Spanish ship. Under. these circumstances,. our
admiral -had no riht to interfere. - The 'Hon. Member corn-,
plained that our ships did not exert themselves to clear the seas
of pirates, but the Hon. Member ought to know'how extremely
difficult it was to do this. Most of the vessels which came
under the description of pirates were prepared with regular
commissionsfrom recognized belligerent powers. ' It was said
that the American vessels pursued the pirates into their strong
holds. The reason of this was, that the keys lay on the-Ameri-
can coast. If our vessels' had the same opportunities as the
Americans, they would be found equally active in putting down
•the pirates. For instance, if the keys lay at the back of Spit-
head, the pirates Would -be soon routed. He could assure the •
Honourable Member, that Government made every exertion to
protect our shipping. *lnstructions had been sent -out to our
Commanders-in-chief, authorizing them to go even beyond
the limits which the Civil Courts would warrant. With
aespeet• to what had been said on the subject of convoys,
he could only observe, that Government felt a difficulty in
ordering our vessels' to giye convoy, because it might lead to
'circumstances that .Would- involve us in ,wars- This country
Was only restrained from taking what the Honourable Member
seemed to consider effectual means of protecting our shipping
by a desire. not to infringe the rights 'of other nations, as well
as to preserve our• own inviolate. We did not want power;
if we were to man our navy, no doubt we could do what we
;pleased upon the-sea. He dared to say, that our officers and
seamen would have no objection to such a system, if Parlia
ment would turn them out. He remembered older officers'
Can himself to have said, that there was a time when we never
did right on the sea, and never suffered wrong...-(A laugh.)--
would seem asthoUgh the Hon. Member desired to revert to
that good old time. With respect to the blockades which had
been declared in consequence of the quarrels which had arisen
among the rising States of South America, this country had no
right to interfere. Every thing, however, possible had been
done by our navy on the coasts of Peru and Chili for 'the prOtec-,
tion of British vessels. By - means of negociation alone, and
without having recourse to violent measures of any kind, Go-
vernment had obtained the release of all British vessels which had
been seized, and he would say justly seized, upon those coasts.—
( Hear! )a-But theHon.Gent.wished us to go farther Chan this,and
to imitate the conduct of the Americans. Now, what had been
the result of the course pursued by America ? It appeared by
the last despatches that American vessels had been forbidden
to enter Lima. What would haYe, been 'said if the countryhad adopted a line of policy which would have involved us in
a quarrel with these rising States, the result of which, there
could be little doubt, would have been to render them an easy
conquest to their old masters ? If Government had acted in
this manner, they would'' have been scouted from that House.
This was a circumstance which the Petitioners did net seem to
have taken into their consideration, and he thought he had a
riest to declare that the Petitioners appeared to consult their
own interests rather than those of the country in general.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY_ commenced by mat-
ing, that the present petition was merely a counterpart of one
which had been presented a few evenings since from Liverpool.
He regretted that the merchants of London should have fol.
lowed that example. Unless the petitioners suspected the Go-
vernment of supineness, and believed the Admiralty to be their
enemies, he thought the best course they could adopt would be
to endeavour to open the eyes of the Admiralty upon the sub-
ject. • He deprecated the discussions which- arose Upon such
petitions, as tending to expose British shipping to greater risks
than they at present ran. The Hon. Member who presented
the petition entertained opinions which, never could be acted
upon. lie desired, that British cruisers should be converted
into a kind of roving Court of Admiralty, to adjudicate in all
cases where vessels were retaken from pirates. It was said that
this was done by America. This might be so ; but he was slim
it would not be long before America would seethe necessity of
regulating the conduct of her naval officers by her own laws.
He thought this country had no reason-whatever to complain
of the conduct of the Governments existing in South America.
The Noble Lord then proceeded to notice several cases of cap,
turewhich had been alluded to. With resPeetto the captureof the
Hebe, the Admiralty had no knowledge of it. As to the
Vigonia' they certainly were in possession of circumstances
connected with the seizure of that vessel, and it was, he must
- say, a case open, prima fiche, to-extreme suspicion. He would
not state his opinion on the question now, lest it might preju-
dice
the proceedings that were at present pending. _The vessel,
it appeared, had proceeded from Valparaiso with a cargo of •
Corn for Monte Video; but, instead of proceeding to the south,
to double Cape Horn, she sailed to the north, anti it was sus-
pected
that she meant to go to Lima. The port of-Callao was -
blockaded, but still she took a northern 'course, and went to
Guipuscoa, where she was - detained. Judicial - proceedings
were now in progress against her; and _therefore lie hoped the'
Hon. Member and the House would pause before they,erime.to
a hasty decision on a case of this kind. He had stated chat 'he
was in possession of a :ist of 18 cases cf detention of, British
• vessels which had occurred in the Pacific 'ocean, and to
on a former evening, allusion bad been niade by the Right
Bon. Member for Liverpool (Mr. Canning.) With respect to
Many of these, he could give some intelligible, if not the most
satisfactory, information. In those-10 cases, there was only one
single instance of complete condemnation. It was said that this
country might protect foreign property, by allowing the use of
British papers. But.if that were once permitted, where were they
to stop ? The line once broken, it was impossible to say how
far the principle might be carried. As to vessels of whose
depredations the merehants'coMplained, if they were met and •
recognized as pirates, they would be treated as such : but it was
impossible filet their naval officers should carry about with them
the powers of a Court of Admiralty, to decide what cases were
and what were not piratical. The only complete case of !con-
demnation .amongst those .111 was that of the_Lydia. Another
vessel had also been condemned; but as some doubts arose as to
the justice of the condeinnation, the cargo had been sold, and the
proceeds lodged in the treasury of Cadiz for a year, to await the
event of any appeal that might be made. This showed that
the Spanish Government did not deal with cases of this •kind
in that offhanded and inconsiderate way which had been, im-
puted to them. The Rebecca, the Catalina, the Edward Ellice,
the Lord Suffield, 'the Washington, and the Robert, had been
released. The case of the Columbia remained tindecided., Theie•
,were four cases of a peculiar character, distinguishable from all
the rest..' These were the cases of vessels detained by the Chilian
squadron under Lord Cochrane. He seemed,to think, because
he was carrying on war against Peru, which •he supposed to be
subject to the Colonial Laws of Spain, that therefore lie was
entitled\ to,deal with the property which lie found proceeding
thither by sea; in the same manner that the Chili= Govern-
ment would dispose of 'it if they met it on land. He would
not, he said, allow the enemies of Chili to reap any benefit
. from the duties which the cargoes would produce, and there-
fore he seized them. This was a sort of law which Lord
Cochrane might understand,' but certainly his Majesty's Go-
vernment did not recognize it, and they had directed strong
• remonstrances to be made to the Chilian Government on

the subject. He saw nothing in. the tone or temper of that
Government of which he had any right to complain, and
he hoped they would be able to bring Lord. Cochrane to
reason. If this Government 'could not alter the laws of Spain,
they could not allow Lord. Cochrane to set up a new code of
laws of his own. - Therefore it would be necessary to discuss
with the Chilian Government the question which Lord Coch-
rane had raised. He would, under those circumstances, recem-

• PRIcE SIyENPENCt.

'mend the Hon. Member for Sandwich pls. Mseryatt), and ail
those Gentlemen who *ere interested in . the: South American
trade, (unless they could persuade- themsolvels mid" the public
that there was-some supineness in the Gdyernment of the coun-
try,-sOme deficiency in adopting proper eneasuata by the pre-,
sent naval administration,) to exert•Stheir aceiviOy in pointing
out to-Ministers the best mode ..by which theaespiratical prac-
Aicesscould. be - removed, instead of .beinging. -their complaints
before-the House ; because he believed _that -very little practi-
cable advantageasonld be derived from- explanationS given in
Parliament. ' Complaints of this• nature led:ate-4y to statements
p.ointing. out the diffietilite.s,which pressentatlttheinselYes in act-
against the obnoxicnis parties. • Oil these grioshls, he hoped.
;Gentlemen would -not attribute to Goverrneventeor to the naval
administration .of the country, any supineness -els; he could not
help thinking that, under all the circumstkoces;GoVernment had
conducted-this great- and important•qUestionein- a 'very satisfac-
tory manner.—( Hear.; hear !) est t •:t. •
Air.- BR IGHT said; it was, in his opinion,••neee4sary to bring
this subject before-the-House, if for no other, purpose than to
,draw forth those matters of fact which the: Neshie Lord had
stated. • When circumstances of :thiseeleaeritation Were investio
gated before Parliament, it was' impossiiale. but; that benefit
would result to the country from the ineuitye - For his own
part he could not acquit the Admiralty of euplaenees. It was
'stated that this was a question with Indepeanent-Powers. He
denied-the fact. Such a statement Was gaits -fallacious. There
were two queStions—the first with Chili and Peen, which he ad-
mitted to be independent states : the second, with those pirates
on the island of Cuba. The Noble. Lord .and., his colleagues
said, " If we find out pirates we know how to deal With them."
He would ask, what did a pirate mean - Did it mean a small
vessel coming suddenly out of a place of concealment, her crew
armed with swords, pistols, and knives, robbing defenceless
vessels,- plundering their cargoes, and hanging -op their crews ?
—[ Sir G. COCKBURIST—They are not pinoes.]—Then what is
a pirate
Sir G. COCKBURN.—If such a vessel as the Honourable
Member. alluded to, had proceeded from Spain; under Spa=
nish colours, she would not be a pirate. Spain would have to
answer for any outrage or violence committed by that vessel.,
and a war would ensue between the two countries,- if, on a _
formal complaint being made, redress were not afforded. If a
Vessel were met, sailing under a black flag, bearing.an incrip-
tion— We are friends to plunder, and enemies to every power
we -come up with,"—or if a ship were discovered bearing no co-
lours whatever, there could not be any doubt as to the course
to be adopted-towards her; but the case waa very different when
ships were sailing under a particular flag.
Mr. BRIGHT- continued.—He was then to understand
.that if a vessel were provided with simulated Tapers, and
hoisted any flag the crew thought fit to assume, she was
not to be treated as a pirate, although she had commit-
ted the most dreadful outrages on unprotected men. If that
were the case, there was an end of all security on the sea : for
nothing could be more easy than to fit out a vessel under these
false pretences, and to rob and plunder every ship that was in-
ferior to her in force. His opinion, however; was, that when
the crew of a vessel perpetrated acts which were unknown to
civilized war, she must be considered prima facie as a pirate,
and no power ought to interfere for the purpose of preventing the
infliction of that punishment on her crew which they appeared
to deserve. This was the line taken by the Americans. If the
ships of all nations were attacked by Vessels fitted out in the
harbours of States that were said to be at peace with all the
world, the aggressors must be looked upon as nirates, and should
be treated as such. Was a case of this kind to be met by fictions
of law and metaphysical fallacies Were those marauders to
be allowed to destroy all the property on the sea in conse-
quence of some technical subtilty ? It was useless to lay down
such doctrines as those lie had heard that night avowed. If the
law really was as- it had been 'tilted to be, then, indeed, he
agreed ts•ith the Noble Lord, that it was useless, nay, worse
than useless, to come to that House With complaints. They,
as practical men, must look at the essence of the thing ; they
must examine the risk which they would runt-by putting down
those piratical practices. He wished to know. where was the
difference between America and England ? ,Why should the
former do that which the latter had neglected to do ?—[Sir
GEORGE COCXBURNT—" What have the Americans done?"]
--They had taken the vessels of those pirates, .and .they had
protected the commerce of ether countries. There was a squa•
dron of frigates, American and trench, stanched in those seas.
For what were they sent there but to protect the trade of those
nations ? They certainly were not sent therefor nothing. Why
was not the same thing done by England ? Had we vessels wait-
ingin those particular places which were infested by the pirates ?
lie believed that Englandhad a greater naval three on " the sta-
tion" than America and France; but why were 'they not on the
right spot, in the neighbourhood of the llavannali, where the
Americans were cruising ? The name of an English vessel was
not heard of there ; but the names both of French and Ameri-
can vessels were heard of. By the accounts which-they had been
put in possession of this evening, it would almost appear as if
there were no British vessels in thosei seas. This want of energy
'proved the weakness, not of the country, but of the Govern-
ment, who ought to protect the-commerce of the nation. This
incipient system of piracy was of more importance than might,
at first view, be imagined. The history of the Buccatiiers ought
to excite a strong desire to destroy the present gang of pirates,
before they because formidable. That was- the history of a
body of brave but cruel and violent men, who laid waste those
Very coasts for many years. They were armed'-in the same
manner as these pirates were, and they acted precisely as these
marauders did. The depredations committed:, by the vessels
which hovered about Cape Antonio were directly similar to the
outrages former] y,perpetrated by the Buccaniers. They must give
up all trade in those seas, unless a strong representation were
made to the Spanish Government, stating that if they would not
put down this piratical system, England must: take the matter
into their own hands, and deal with those phusderers as their
crimes merited.—(Hear, hears from the Ministerial benches.)--
lie understood that a representation had been made : but it
was one thing to do an act, and another to do it effectually. If
the Spanish Government were tardy in removing the evil, the
British Government ought to take the matter -up. In his
opinion, it a British vessel took a ship, the crew of which had
hung up the captain of an English trader which had fallen into
their power, that House would, and ought to remunerate the
English officer, if, in seizing the perpetrators--of such cruelty,
he advanced beyond the strict line of his duty.' Vile House of
Commons, in considering this 'subject, ought to look to its
essence and merits, and not to books of law, which were fre-
quently understood in a very imperfect manner.:
Mr. CROKER said, he was glad the Hon.-Member had.
plainly stated what was his view of the question. The com-
plaint was, that an unlawful protection was given by the Spa-
nish territory for the purpose of covering acts of violence. Tu
check this, the Hon. Member said; that he would, in the first
place, tell the Spanish Government, that if they would not
-put an end to those piratical practices, the Government of this
country would do it themselves ; andln the mean time he would
cause orders to be sent out to the British Admiral, to station
vessels in those particular parts where the principal mischief
arose. • He knew not by what means the Honourable Member
had get access to the dispatches in his ( Mr. Croker's) oflice,but
he had most accurately described the orders given to the Ad-
miral on the 'West India stationon'ithe 23d Marchlast. That dis-
patch, after recapitulating all the cases of piracy, Stated that the
Lords of the Admiralty had called the attention of the Secretary
. of State for Foreign Affairs to the hardships which had been
inflicted on the crews of different vessels. It-pointed out die
mode in which the pirates carried on their depredations, by
keeping their vessels close in shore, by forming a sort of estab-
lishment on the island of Cuba, and by escaping. ioland when-
ever they were pursued. It then went on to say, that this state
of things
.justified the British Government in requiring the
Spanish Government either to take immediate measures them-
selves to bring those atrocious criminals to punishment, or at
least that the Spanish flag and her territorial rights should not
: prevent Great Britain from taking the necessary measures for
' destroying this nest of pirates.—(Hear, hear !)—This was in
every point of view, the course which the Hon.. Member (Mr.
Bright) had himself recommended, but the deSpatchovent still
farther : it directed the Admiral to send one of his cruisers to
.Cape St. Antonio to protect the British conurterce, and if
passible, without violating the Spanish territorial rights, to cut
off these piratical marauders, so 'that all that- the Honour.
able Member recommended in . his accusatory tirade had
been done so long ago as the 2:ld of March. But he
must say, that those principles e of resistance were laid
down the moment Government heard of the outrages in ques-
tion. Now, would the lion. Gentleman, before Spain ad
got an opportunity of inquiring into the state--of the case,
call upon Great Britain to invade adtlony of that esoun try ? The
Hon. Member had-said, that-this was a case of life and death
and blood, and that care ought to betaken toprivent it frouf
coming to such extremities 'as might be fraught with the
most lamentable consequences:. And yet what asks- the recom-
mendation of the. Ilonehrable- lanber ? He wished, before

-Spain had received any information from the 'Havannah, that
Anglaral should invade that territory, and thus involve not only
the two nations, but all Europe in war. If that were the Hon.
)ember's mode of preventing bloodshed, it was happy fbr the
world that he had no: the direction of the national councils.—
The lion. Member said he would not respect a flag borne by
a small vessel belonging to a power at peace with all the world,
if that vessel committed any depredation. He (Mr. Croker)
would till the Hon. Member, that there would never be any
,peaCe in the world if individual officers were allowed to decide
on the degree of protection which a flag affbreied. The law of
raticos was founded on expediency. It was built on interna-
tional riff!-, and was intended for the benefit of the world at
large ; and he must contend, in accordance with that law, that
where a ship sailed ursder a particular flag, it might be consider-
ed t-caza fide as belee,eing to that country whose flag it carried.
The muse complained of was, that on pretence of making war
en enemies:, the parties implicated had made war on neutrals ;
'and here, to.holster up his case, the Hon. Member argued that
tat South American States were at peace with all the world. This
was not the fact. They were at war with each ocher, which led to
the circiunstanceof five onsix independent flags being hoisted in
• those seas. The Hon. Member's statement was as extraordinary
in poirt of fact as his recommendation was unsound in point of
law. His Noble Friend had truly stated that the people of
those countries were already sufficiently astute in evading the
law. From ha nature the law of nations was more difficult of
exposition than the municipal law ; and the very answer which
the Hon. Member's argument had wrung from his Gallant
Friend behind him (Sir G. Cockburn.) would perhaps do all the
mischief which his Noble Friend had apprehended, by teaching
these persons effectually to evade the law of nations. Unless a
case could he adduced which would lead the House to pass a
censure on his Majesty's Government, he thought it would be
much better both for the interests of commerce, and for the
power and character of the British navy, if Hon. Gentlemen
would do Ministers the justice to place in their hands whatsoever
information they collected, and 'leave them to make the best
. arrangements which the circumstances admitted. All the cases
of capture which had been mentioned, comprised but two in-
stances of condemnation. One of them was a condemnation in a
.•• case of absolute and avowed fraud. The other was a case ofl
a doubtful character. -But such was the force of British repre-
sentations, that, though a condemnation had taken place, and
• the goods were sold in the second instance, yet the proceeds of
re the cargo were lodged in the Treasury of the.mother country,
there to remain for one year, pending any appeal which might
-• be lodged by the parties themselves, or by their Government ;
and the British Governmentliad at the time sent out orders to
Sir Thomas Hardy. There was therefore but one case of con-
. tiemirationS and that wasA juut one, because.it was founded on a
fraue on the part of the haptured. Was it not, then, better to
I:•ave this matter in the hands of the Government, instead of
bringing complaints before that House, which could only have
the effect of giving encouragement to piracy ?
Dr. LUSIIINGTON said, it was not all unnatural that the
merchants of London and Liverpool should desire, in a public
manner, to call attention to -the losses they had incurred; nor
was he satisfied that the public discussion of the subject would
produce those evils which had been anticipated. He saw, how-
ever, that it was not possible for the Government, whatever
• might be its exertions, to protect our commerce from all in-
convenience during the continuance of the present hostilities.
There was now a war between Spain and her colonies, and
while that war continued, it was quite clear that our ships
would be subject to the rights of visitation and search, unless
we denied that right to others which we vindicated for ourselves.
While visitation and search might be carried on, our vessels
must be subject to all the consequences that attended it; to oc-
casional vexation and inconvenience in the manner of executing
it, and to liability to condemnation, if the laws of war be
violated ; for if a neutral vessel entered the port of a belligerent
• - that was de facto blockaded, she was undoubtedly liable to be
condemned. These mischiefs, he hoped, would always con-
• tinue.—(Hear !)—The sight of visitation and search, on the
• part of a belligerent, was the most valuable which England
possessed.—(Hear, hear.} _He desired to see it freely allowed
to other States ; and if, as in the present instance, it was at-
'tended with some inconvenience to the mercantile interest, it
would be infinitely outweighed by the advantage to that very
interest in time of war.---(Hear, hear, hear.)—Another point
was attended with greater difficulty, and arose out of the state
- -of our relations with the Sopth American States. We did not
yet acknowledge them as independent States. What then became
of territorial claims with reference to those colonies, which were
in -this dilemma—dc facto, the territory was in the independent
"States, de jure, in Old Spain ? Yet it must he the union of
both characters to constitute a basis of a territorial claim.—
The Noble Lord had said that Spain was not at liberty to en-
lone her colonial laws, as. she was not In possession of the co-
lonies. Now he could not but remember the case of St. Do-
, mingo. That colony was wiested from France in 1794, yet in
1803, the High. Court of Appeal? with Sir W. Grant at its head,
- • iteld that it was still to be considered a French Colony. This
brought him to a subject in which he felt the greatest interest ;
• 'lie was most. anxious to see Great Britain come forward, as early
.as her honour would permit, to acknowledge the independence
ofethe Sonth American states. He was aware there was some
difficulty, eon
.account of the treaty which the Noble
••' Lord •liad .tinfortunately signed, in -which it was -stipulated
that Ave .should not give assistance of a "particular .descrip-
tion to the revolted. colonies, and it was moreover declared that
•- hit •Beititinie Majesty was. most anxious' -that • they should re-
- halt to their allegiance. The treaty hardly should have been
sighed, when, a.ahe well recollected; General Picton, as repre-
SO Wive of this. Government in 1798, urged by all - the Means
itt•biS povier these colonies. to assert their independence, and
attiongh those persuasions did not then take-effect, great part of
- the noble • and generous courage 'of the inhabitants of South
e America had been called forth by those incitements of our Go-
e vet:orient. As to Cuba it had been said, that before any steps
Were taken against the pirates who harboured there; it was ne-
- ceiSitryto -apply to the Government of Old Spain. If Cuba
etas si colony d; ~..t0 and de jure of -Spain, then it might be
necessary to make previous communications to the mother coun-
try; but if, as was the case, Cuba was governed by a GoVern-
merit in reality not at all dependent • upon Spain, though it
might be right as a matter of compliment to make an applica-
tion to the mother country, it would be absurd to wait long for
her to do that which she had not the power of doing. We
should go to the Government of Cuba, and say, we presume
" you must have received such orders as a civilized Govern-
ment would give," and if measures were not taken, the task of
seizing and • punishing the pirates would devolve upon us.
As to the appropriation of the British vessel which had been
'recaptured from the pirates by the Spaniards, he allowed that
Sir C. Rowley might well hesitate to decide on such a point of
law, th6ugh the impression on his (Dr. Lushington's) mind
- was, that the seizure by pirates did not alter the property of the
vessel; and that on its recapture, the property was still vested in
the original owner, and had merely changed hands. The
. Admiralty orders, he .allowed, •were, very good; but the
best orders, it must be remembered, were of no use, un-
less they were executed, and to execute them there must
be sufficient force. The last difficult question was, what
they should take ? Spanish vessels they must not touch :
independent vessels the Noble Lord said they should not
touch; that is, wavieg the question of law, he had
given orders that it should he put on the same footing as the!
Spanish flan.. Veesels intending to commit acts of piracy might
take any flag. If they took the British flag, for instance, no
-. ship. of c,ny other nation could do any thing but make a very
low bow and pass on. Only that country whose flag it bore
had a right to deal with a vessel. The only way was to make
representations to the States whose flags were made the covers
fur piracy, and to allow the Admiral, on his best judgment, this
- country being responsible for any mistake, to capture vessels,
to identify the pirates if he could, and to try and execute them.
The difficulty had not now risen for the first time. It
had been discussed for one hundred and twenty years, and pro-
bably longer, and he could not oven suggest the mode of' re-
lieving it. As to the suggestion that the protection of our con-
voys should be allowed to other neutrals, he saw an insur-
mountable difficulty. A neutral flag might be employed to
cover belligerents' property, Now it was the practice of the
British convoy flag to allow to search :—and he hoped that for
no temporary difficulty, so valuable a right would be tres-
passed on.—alearl)--The subject of the petition was certainly
•of the highest importance; it was not merely the immediate
loss, hut the rise on insurance, as the increased rate of wages,
and of all other expences, and the consequent diminution of
British commerce ; nor was it to be left out of the considera-
tion that most of the acts of piracy had been attended witth eir-
eintistances of horror and barbarity.—(Hear !)—He hoped,
therefore; the Government would continue to give it their serious
attention

Mr. CROKER, i. explanation, stated that a dispatch had
been ent out on toe 18th June, to the Admiral.on the stations,
acquainting him with the answer of the Spanish Government,
and the orders they had issued to Cuba, and desiring him to
look to their execution.

Dr. PHILLIMORI; said he hoped this country would al-
ways extend to other powers those principles which, under dif-
ferent circumstances, she had defended for herself. It would,
he conceived, be most atrocious conduct if, after the arduous
struggle they had maintained for the right of search and visita-
tion, they should be the first to turn round and oppose the ex-
ercise of that right by other nations.
Mr. FORMS said that the trade to South America might he
a very profitable trade, but undoubtedly it was a very hazardous
one ; and those who engaged in it must be prepared to abide
lay those hazards.
The petition was then brought up. On the question " that
-the petition be now read,"
Mr. MARIWATT thought that at all events the discussion
which had occurred would do good. The Noble Lord had
given the best account of the transactions generally which had
yet been furnished ; and the Honourable. Secretary of the Ad-