Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1807-07-15

vi regular pfdt, 10 winch the most lncon- |
siderable, articles ofproperty captured on J
the higliseas, rs entitied; and leaves their |
destiny 10 the will OF AN officer, sometimes |
cruel, often ignorant, and generally inter-
ested by his want Of mariners, in his own
decisions. Whenever property found in a
neutral vessel, is supposed to be liable, on
any grounds to capture and condemnation,
the rule IN all cases is that the question
shall not be decided by the cartor, but be
Carried before a legal tribunal, where Il
regular trial may be had, and where the /
captor himself is liable to damages, for an
abuse of his power. Can ii be reasonable
then, or just that belligerent comman-
der, who is thus restricted, and thus re-
Sponsible m case of mere property oftri-
vial amount, should be permitted, without
recurring to any tribunal whatever, toex-
anime the crew of q neutral vessel, to de-
eide the important quest on of their re-
spective allegiances and to carry that deci- 1
SION into instant execution, by forcing every
individual he may choose, into service alb
horrent TO his feelings, cutting him of from
ms most tender connections, exposing his
mind and his person to the most humiliating
discipline, and his ife itself to the great
est dangers? Reason, Justice and humani.
ty unite IN protesting against so eXtrava.
giant proceeding. And what is the pre-
text torlt 1t is that the similarity of Ian
Suage and of features between American
citizens and British subjects, are such as
not easily TO be distinguished and that
without this arbitrary aud summary au-
thorlty to make the distinction, British
subjects would escape, under the name of
American citizens, from the duty which
they owe TO their sovereign. Is then the diff
hcuity OF distinguishing mariner Of one
country from the mariner ofthe other, x the
importance OF his services, a good plea for
referring the question whether he belongs to
the one or to the other, to an arbitrary de-
ciS'on on the spot, by an interested and un-
responsible officer? In all other cases, the
difficulty and the Importance of questions
are considered as reasons for requiring
greater care and formality in investigating
them, Ind greater security for Il right de-
clsion on them. To say that precautions
OF this sort are Incompatible with the OBJ
Ject IS to admit the Objects unjusti6able
since the only means by which it can be
pursued are such as cannot be justified
The evil takes deeper die, when view
ed N its practice as wei as its principles
Were it allowed that British subjects
should be taken out OF American YES
seis on he high seas, it might at least be
required that the proof of their allegiance
| "'''Niih 1iO VII NiS DIltlSll SlOC. MS ODVi-
Gus and just rule is, however, reversed :.
and very seaman on board though goirg
from an American port, and sailing under
the American fiag, and sometimes even
speaking an idiom proving him not to be Il
British subject, is presumed to be such,
uniess snewn TO be an American tizen.
ii may safely be affirmed that this is an
outrage and an indignity which has no pre-
cedent, and which reat-Britain would be
among the last nations in the world to suffer,
! II offered 10 her own subjects, and her own
! Has. Nor is it always against the right
presumption alone, which is in favor of the
citizenship corresponding with the flag, that
! the violence is committed Not unfre-
quently it takes place in defiance of the
most positive proof, certified in due form
| by an American officer Let it not be
said, that in granting TO American sea-
men this protection for their rights as
such, the point is yielded, that the proof
lies on the American side, and that
the want of it in the prescribed form
Justifies the inference that the seamen is
not of Am rican allegiance. 1t is distinct-
ly to be understood, that the certificate u
suaily called protection to American
seamen, IS not meant to protect them IN
| der their o7cl, or cUcn anu other neutral
! flag on the high seas. We can never adj
init, that in such a situation, any other
protection is required for them than the
neutral jag HSeJ on the high seas. The
document is given toprove their real cha
racter, in situations to which neither the
law OF nations, nor the law of their own
country, are applicable; in other words.
to protect them within the Jurisdiction of
the British laws, and 10 secure to them.
within every other jurisdiction, the rights
and immunlties due to them IF, i'm the
course OF their navigation even on the
n gh seas, the document should have the
effect of repelling wrongs of any sort, it is
an incidental advantage only, of which thew
avail themselves, and is by no means to be
misconstrued INTO a right to exact such a
proof, or to make any disadvantageous in
ference from the want of it,
Were it even admitted, that certificates
for protection might be Justly required in
time of war, from American seamcn, they
could only be required in cases where the
lapse of me from its commencement. had
gwen an opportunity for the American sea-
men to provide themselves W, th such do
cument. Yetit is certain, that i'm a variety
of instances, seamen have been impressed
from American vessels, on the plea that
they had not tins proof of citizenship, when
the dates and places of the impressments
demonstrated the impossibility of their
knowing in time to provide the proof, that
a state of war had rendered it necessary.
Whether, therefore, we consult the law
e. 80 -. 4