The Sun.
London, England, 1802-03-26 00:00:00

SUPPLY.

• Mr. Ar.ExANDEß.brought up the Report of the
qommittee of Supply, which was read, •
On the question for:agreeing •with the Resolution
. of the Committee relative to the Grant of fs.,opol.
-to the Earl of: ST. VI 1, c ENT) and Lord Oa EY, •
Mr. ROBSON said, he thought if required fur-
ther consideration. These Noble ComManders had,
,he said, Made seizures, and erected Courts of Ad_
miralty for the condemnation of the Vessels seized,
of their own authority.. :the -money was, it ape
Fared; invested in the Funds, and-. part of this
• vote was to make gOod the loss occasioned by that.
`Tie thought this Vote
.wot;Ild establish an injurious
precedent; and in the present case, there was not
information to form a judgment upon, as there was
bUt one' Paper relative to the. subjeCt, and that he
had not been able to discover before.
Mr. N. FANSITTART said, he should trouble
.•• •
the House with but a few words, as the Hon. Gen-
tleman knew nothing ,of the subjeEt, except from a
Paper, which he could not find. The alluded
to had been for some time: lying upon the Table, as
well as other Papers relative to the same snbjea.
The lion.
.Gentleman had contended, that these
Noble Commanders had made the 'Seizures-Aif their
own authority; but the fait was, that they merely
obeyed the orders of Government, as they were
bound to do, and in obedience to those orders,
m::de the seizures in question ; and not only this,
but they had also acted, in this instance, in strid
conformity with the known Law of Nations.—
They had been told by the Hon. Gentleman, that
part of this Vote was to make_good a loss oCeasion-
ed by investing the money in the Ftnids ; but the
fia was not so, as the proceeds of the Captures were
merely invested in the Funds, until the Appeals
were decided. - The Hon. Gentleman had said, that
these Nobie'Commanders had ereaed Courts of Ad-
rniralty of their own authoiity ; but no one could
contend, that these Courts were- not governed by
the principles of Equity ; or that Commanders, in
such situations, were not empowered to erect such
Courts. They had been told, that there was a
ground of alarm on the Score of precedent : this
however, could not.be the case, as the Vote would
include the whole Fleet and Artny, and 'was an in-
aemnifiCation to the whole, as reoresented by the
Commanders in Chief. These Comaianders were
certainly entitled to an indemnity; as they had
acted in -strict obedience to the orders of their
Country. •

Mr. N/CHOLLS observed, that no benefit
would be co:net-red upon these N:thle Commanders,
by this Vote, as it was merely to indemnify them
from the consequences of obeying the orders of the
Executive Government, which indemnification they
were justiy entitled to.

Mr. lONE,C said, he agreed with the Hon.
Gentleman Miho had spoken last, as to the general
principle ; but the question was, whether these
Noble Commanders had not, in this instance, aeted
v..rongfuly in the execution of the orders of Govern-
ment
Mr. N. VANSI•ITART explained.

Mr.
_7Ol-INSTON said, he admitted generally
that Naval and Military Officers obeying the orders
of their.Cuuntry, were entitled to be indemnified
from any consequences which might arise from the
execution of these orders, but in applying it in the
present instance, he must look at the circumstances
of the case. The Order of Council issued in No..

' verriber 1793, authorized these Noble Commanders
to detain American vessels, but only authorized
them. to detain such vessels, and not to proceed to
adjudication"; and had they not.ere&ed Courts of
Admiralty and proceeded to the adjildication of these.
vesselsohe'revocation of that Order which was is-
stied in November 7794, might.have arrived in the
West Indies time enough
.to prevent any ill -con-
sequences resulting from the former Order ; he
was of opinion therefore, -that they had exceeded
their powers. It had been,said that their conduct
was in stria conformity with the Law of Nations,
but this law had been relaxed in some instances,
and in this case, there had previously existed a trade
between the States of America and the French
Colonies. He thought the Noble Commanders had
aded rashly, and what he would suggest in the pre-
sent instance, was, that considering their high cha-
raeter, and the splendid services they had rendered
to the Country, an indemnification should not be
wholly refused •to them, but that they sliduld be
called upon for a statement of profit and loss with
tespea to their commands; and if their prize money
was not adequate to this sum, then that they should
be indemnified with respeft to the remainder, but if
it was more than equivalent, then that this sum
should should be set offagainst those gains.
The CHANCELLOR of the ,EXCII,EQUER
said, if he understood what the Hon. Gentleman
(Mr. JOHNSTON) had said, it was this, thrall the
profits made by the Earl of ST. VINCENT and Lord
GREY in their commands should be stated, and that
sum contained in the resolution should be set against
this statement as A deduEtion. Did the Hon. Gen-
tleman mean to state that these Noble Lords bad
acquired any part of their profits illegally, that he
proposed thus to take it away from them, when
they only claimed an indemnification from the con-
sequences of having done their duty ? But he sus-
peace' that the Hon. Gentleman meant, that if those,
profits amounted to only 45,0001., they were to
receive nothing. This was not liberality ; it was
not justice. The Hon. Gentleman had said, that
in consideration of their condua, he would overlook
this instance : they wanted no such proteaion ; nor
would they endure, that unjust and illegal condua,
if there had been any, should be passed over in that
way,. It had been alledged by the Hon. Gentleman,
that the Order only authorized them to detain Ves-
sels ; the Order Was not upon the Table, but he
was confident that it authorized them to bring the
Vessels to adjudication ; and that under the words
of the Order they would not have been justified in
merely detaining, but were bound to proceed to
adjudication, as they did, in obedience to that
Order. The Hon. Gentleman (Mr. JOHNSTON) had,
however, stated something still more degrading to
these Noble Commanders ; he had said, that though
they knew of- the Order being revoked, they still
continued to aft in conformity, with the former
Order, and in defiance of the Order ofßevdcation.
Such a charge; so made, could not for a moment be
endured; let the Hon. Gentleman prove it, and
let him stare the authority on which he founded it.
That the charge was unfounded, there.was not the
least doubt. He thought it necessary to say thus
much in answer to the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. JOHN-
sroN) ; with respeet to the case itself, he should
add nothing to what had been so clearly stated by
his Hon. Friend (Mr. N. VANSITTART.)

Mr. MARKHAM said, he had himself aaed
under-the orders of these Noble Commanders, and
though he could not recollea the precise words of
the Order of Council, under the authority of which
they afted, yet he was confident that it authorized
them to bring the vessels which they seized to ad- ,
judication. As to the _creaion of Courts of Ad-
miralty by the Commander in Chief, it could not
`be
otherwise ; in such cases vessels were brought
in with cargoes consisting of perishable commodi-
ties, and the cargoes must either perish whilst the
Commander in Chief sent, to -England for instruc-
tions, or ,he-.must. ere& Courts of Admiralty,

. The ATTORNEY GENERAL said, that the
Order in question was founded upon a decision re-
lative to the Law of Nations, which was the pro_
duff of the colleEtive wisdom of the Court of Privy
Council in ,the year 1756. The Order in this case
was peremptory, in conformity with which these
Noble Oflicers had made the seizures, and they
could have recovered an indemnification by adion ;
it was part of the contraCl with them, that they
should be indemnified from the consequence of exe-
cuting a perilous order. Whether the condemna-
tion of the vessels was good or not, did not signify,
the execution of the order was the same, and these
Noble Commanders ought to be indemnified. With
respetl to the appeals, he should only say, that the
Americans were extremely lucky in having their
vessels returned. He then made some comments on
the Law of Nations, and concluded by observ-
ing, that in thus troubling the House, he had
no expectation of making the smallest impression
on the mind, of the 'Honourable Gentleman opposite
to him (Mr. Roasox) : he should not attempt to
operate any improvement on the understanding, the
language, or the apprehension of that Hon. Gentle..
man, having been, for his part always unwilling
to embark in desperate undertakings.
The Resolution was then agreed to, 'as welt also
all the other Resolutions.