The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1808-01-05

/ tainly not how absurd then to talk of our do
minion, or any other rights upon it, than such
as the laws of hostility give us, such as we
| enjoy bY covenant or custom. We can have
no other. Ministers, therefore, in their pro
clamation, have very wisely dropped the
question.
Having disposed of the two preliminary
questionable existence and obligation of
the law of nations, which we trust we have
sufficiently proved, and the right of dominion
over the seas which we ilattcr ourselves we
| have sufficiently disproved, we now pass to
| the other divisions of the controversy.
We contend that the legitimate rights Of
search are not conceded or abrIdsed by this
proclamation. We never had - lit to search
| ships of war, either for our sailors or any
species of contraband. The subject has ne
law, but it may easily be determined upon ge-
neral principles and causes of analogy.
1t is well known rule in the law of natl
ons that we have no right to apprehend a de-
serter in neutral territory; that is, to pur-
sue him for the sake CT apprehension; be-
cause the general rule which guards as invio-
liable the territory of a neutral state, must
supcrccde the private mischief incurred by
| the loss of man, and the escape of a desert
er from punishment. Here is case in point
which was never denied to be law. What
we are restrained from doing on land we are
restrained, i'll similar case, from doing by
sea. If this hold with respect to desertcrs
who escape in our immediate sight, how much
more strongly will it hold in regard to those
sailors who have forsakcn no service or en-
gagement whatever, but have voluntarily en-
listed in neutral ship!
With regard to the frst-the reception of
known deserters, it is the duty of the neutral
TO restore them, and in case of refusal there
is just ground of hostility but an officer,
supposing him even to see the act, is not to
wage war; or, i'll the common phrase, to take
the law into his own hands, in resentment of
the immediate injury; because this is no
more nor less than to declare war upon his
own private discretion; and war being the
act OF the state requires much discussion,
and the formal demand of reparation by &C
credited agents, before it can lawfully be
commenced. The officer who, for any injury
whatever, except such as belong to sclf-resst-
ance, which is uniformly allowable, should
attempt to blow neutral ship out of water,
without the license of his state, and the con-
sequent commencement Of hostility, is little
better than brigand or pirate if lie acts
from malicious motive, or q fool i he pro-
ceeds from mistaken one.
The next point is the right to search a
neutral ship OF war, and overhaul her crew,
for the apprehension Of our sailors, whether
deserters or not--Gave we right to do this !.
If there be right, itmuSt certainly be reci-
procal: the American, if obliged to submit
to the search, has, in his turn, a right to
make tiff we require his muster roll he
may require ours-if one of our shiDs of war
visit his cutter; his cutter, for the same pur-
pose, may visit our seventy-four' ST it be a
! right al all, it must either be founded on CO.
venant, or the principles Of common justice
between nations-if founded upon the former,
nrOInCp
America is joint inheritrix with Yourself of
the rights and obligations Of universal JUS
| tice. From this dilemma 1t is impossible for
| yout escape.
| But in plain fact, there is no right whate-
yer to make the search, nor obligation TO sub
NIT to it. Putting the case of the known de-
serter out of consideration, in which, if Ame-
RIGA knowingly receive or entice him, she
commits an injury, though the resentment CT
that injury is a matter of national and not of
private discretion, let us inquire what is the
proper line OF conduct with respect to British
seamen freely enlisted in her service. Is
she TO give them up when she reads the king S
proclamation in our gazette? ASsuredly it
is neither binding upon her conscience nor
her honor. She is no guarantee for the allie
glance of British sailor-she has no obliga-
ton to enquire where he was born, or who be
is, when she had enlisted him He enters
liltO iiCt SGiNlCC ~ INC ndEdIu OF DGiilE lllnE-
ed i'll case he is taken in arms against his
country. If he chooses to run the risk, A
merica NAV accept him under it; the only
rights which she docs not possess over him in
as full n manner as those which she exer-
cises over the rest of her crew, are, that she
cannot reclaim him as her subject (when ia
ken prisoner upon a cartel of exchange or at
the close of war;) notwithstanding she
may have naturalizcd him; because it is an
universal principle Of public law that no man
can shake off his allegiance to the country in
which nc is born memo h0tcst eTcuyc hafri-
an. SO far and no farther are her rights
abridged with respect to this man; with re-
gard TO the desertcr, she is bound to give him
up.
Let the question be put to any Of our off
GERS at the head of pressgang? Do they o.
bige a man TO produce a certificate Of his
country, as a condition of his being admitted
on board a tender! Again, can it be suppos-
ed that, upon the reading Of the proclamation
of foreign state, q" recalling its subjects in
the service of other powers" that the lords Oh
the admiralty would issue their warrants t.
his majcsty's ships, commanding them to dis
charge every man who could not prove him
self to he an Englishman or, in contempla-
ton of the difficulty attending this discrimi-
nation, commanding them to submit to have
their crews Overhaued bv shiys of foreign