Star.
London, England, 1818-03-19 00:00:00

. for the honour of England to see the judgments
her tribunals carried into effect. But there was
rem difference between the common courts of law
of the country, and the tribunal which administered
international law ; because from the moment that
a contract covering all claims was entered into with
Spain, it became part of the law of nations. It was
liseeefore no impeachment of British justice to have
transferred its judgments.to Spain. These judgments,
except in one case, were not against the public, but
- affected the captors. And the persons who had
fined them thought so little of a remedy from
captors, that the judgments were at such a dis-
• that they might be purchased for a few shil-
in the pound. Nay, before the recent Treaty,
gent for the Spanish claimants had complained
a compensation had been given to those of Por-
' (by the 300,0001. paid to its Government) whilst
Spanish subjects were left to endeavour to procure
relief by expensive suits at law. As to the cases in
different stages of proceeding, they consisted of
-trone. Out of that number the Act of 1815
no application whatever to sixteen, for it had no
retrospective effect. Out of the five hat remained,
were in progress of examination, and no judg-
whatever had been given. The fifth, which
. the only one in which judgment had been °b-
aled, stood on totally different grounds. It was
• of the Rosa, which had not been captured at
,ut had been thrown by stress of weather on our
shores, taken possession of by a British Officer, and
condemned in the Court of Admiralty. As the law

rather been strained in that case, and there was

Iputation against the vessel, her value had been
ordered to be restored. Out of the sixteen first cases,

five judgments had been obtained, and that
against the captors, and not against the State. The
- against the public had therefore entirely disap-
peared. The Honourable and Learned Gentleman
.. not pretend that there was any ambiguity in
Treaty to prevent the party from going to Ma-
. with the judgments from this country in their
hands, and claiming compensation. There was no
%%t of that. The King of Spain was to take upOn
mself to compensate his subjects for the losses which
might have sustained up to the signature of the
y. Could any thing be plainer? There was
another consideration which rendered it wise to refer
claimants to Spain for a compensation. Many
,mericans and subjects of other nations had earned
their depredations in disguise under the Spanish
and attempted to claim satisfaction as Spa-
niaids. But the Spanish Goveniment would be able
to clear the point. He hoped that the Honourable
Gentleman's mind was now relieved from the appre-
hension that any imputation of injustice could be
thrown on the character of the country, and that,
persuaded that nothing had been done but what policy
' wisdom required, the House would concur with
in giving a negative to the motion.
Lord ARCHIBALD HAMILTON was of opinion
_ gross injustice had been done to the claimants
somewhere. This he had not heard the Noble Lord
v. The case of the American Treaty cited by the

totile Lord, he contended was by no Means in point.
' with respect to the assertion of the Noble Lord,
. the claimants might apply to Spain under the
:reaty, it appeared to him that the Correspondence
an the table between the Noble Lord and the parties
afforded a sufficient proof that they had no claim on
Spain under the Treaty. Was it fair, 'after a long
process of litigation, which they had maintained at
-.onsiderable expense, to turn these parties over to the
'it of a Treaty which the Noble Lord himself
not go so far as to say gave them any claim ?
—ELord Castlereagh observed across the table, that
had distinctly stated that the Treaty did give the
trties in question a claim on Spain.]--If that were
•- was nevertheless clear to him, from the Corres-
lence on the table, that in those particular cases
Court of Spain was exempt from liability. He
Id certainly vote for the motion ; at the same
he imputed the blame not to the Courts in this
ail, but to the Ministers by whom the Treaty
.1 been arranged.
Lord CASTLEREAGH stated, in explanation,
no parties whatever were excluded from the be-
of the Treaty concluded with .Spain.
WYNN, while he admitted that the sovereign
tthority of a State must have the power which the
ole Lord attributed to it, contended, that the way
which that power was exercised was quite a diffe-
thing. Where we had pointed out to the parties
luestion the mode by which they could obtain a
' remedy, and they had adopted those means, we
not entitled to shut them out from the remedy.
case of America was not applicable to the pre-
, question; for it was notorious, that after the
ferment of the war, the Courts of Law in that coun-
- were not seats of Equity. There were only four
and all that was desired by the Address moved
ry his Honourable and Learned Friend was, that
tvision should he made in order that those claim-
might receive the whole of what was adjudged
them, without being put to the expense, trouble,
' risk of again prosecuting their claims before a
lish Tribunal.
:. BROUGHAM was of opinion, that if the
•onsent of the Court of Spain to abolish the trade
• the only result of the payment of 400,0001. k
td be sufficient ; but he considered that the addi-
tal arrangement relative to the right of search
ithout which the abolition of the trade would be
possible), was of itself worth the whole sum. It
- also to be recollected that the Spanish Govern-
received this money partly in consideration of
_ _

making good the losses sustained by their sub-
by captures ; to which indeed one-half of it
id probably be applicable. The Honourable and
Learned Gentleman argued at considerable length,
the act of our Government was not the cause of

injustice that might be apprehended; for if no
ay- had been concluded, it would have been com-
,ot to the Spanish Government to bar the claims
the parties in question by an act of State. It was
certainly a case of great hardship on the parties who
brought actions and obtained judgments, and on
_ credit of those judgments had perhaps obtained
advances ; but there were many other cases of hard-
', arising out of the established principle, that sub-
.. were bound by the acts of their sovereign. Up
the final adjudication, the whole claim of a captor
might be abandoned for him by his Government ;
saddling him pith all the costs of his action. He
—,ht however, that it would have been much

0
was for
1 of her t
I
athettlitiae ta
coitintrteC:
an
i i,•
1 •
liswefor
transfer
exceptonly aff
i
obtainer
the pt
•, ' count t}
1 lings in
the Age
• that a c
i 1 ,
fugal (la:
Spanish
' relief b;
different
twenty-.
had no
retrospe
four we
t I rnent wl
was the
tained,
that of
sea, but
shores,
condem
e had rat}
!no imps
ordered
only five
against
1 p case a
peared.
could n
the Tre
i 1)
drid wit
hands,
doubt a
himself
• .
'i.
they mi
Treaty.
another
the clai
Americ
on their
1 flag,
ai
niards.
,
! ,
I ' to clear
Gentler
hension
thrown
I .. persua.,3
and wi!
. 1., bim in
Lord
i, 1 Lord
a v.,
somew)
I
1 • deny.
l.
Noble I
.1 And wi
• I 1 that the
i . Treaty,
on the i
afforde
Spain u
process
, conside
I • result o
would i
--ELor
he had
parties i
so, it w.
ponden.
the Cou
• should
time he
country
1 1 had bee
Lord
• ; , that no
nets of
fi( t Mr. 1
I .j, ,
Noble I
• i
' ! 1 in whirl
• t . - rent this
r in quest
I:,2,gieraelcre
, e ne
"I
, a
i. , T
.1
'A
sent qui
. 1 .
. :
•
.
ferment
, try were
cases, a:
`I I- for by I
provisic
I ,
• ants mil
I to them
.
.1 I and ris&
1 i Spanish
ii
consent
were th
would I
tional r./ , • (withou
i i 1 impossi
11.
was als,
, / , • ment re
I their m
jests 1):
world 1
. ,
Learner
that the
.. , any inj.
Treatf
1 1 • ill
potent t
t 1 '
I , 1:1 of the p
certain!
had bro
the crec
• advance
ship ari
jests we
to the 6
might 1
saddling
. ' I
thought
• . \ 1 1 i
„.
‘' 1.1 e, S • -.*
. ..
•., ,
' .