Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1808-05-17

that captain James Barron did use any Ian.
Suage IN the presence of his men calcuIa.
led TO dispirit them. The court are there
tore otopinion, that this ninth specification
rs not proved.
l0,h. 1t does not appear to the conrt
10y satisfactory evidence, that during the
attack captain James Barron ordered his
men to keep down, that they would all he
cut to pieces. The court are therefore of
opinion, that This tenth and last specific,
ton is not proved. The court are sa,is6.
ed that some such words were uttered, but
are also satisfied that the words actually
used were of very different import, and
were uttered at time when they could
not have produced any improper effect IN,
on the crew.
The only two specifications annexed 70
this charge which are proved, are not such
as in the opinion ofthis court establish the
proposition. that the accused "faled To
encourage in his own person his inferior
officers and men To fight courageousiy. >"
His not using immediate measures To pre-
pare his ship for battle after he was sa.
tished an attack upon her would be made,
was certainly great neglect of duty, bu,
TINS does not support any charge against
the persooel spirit OF captain Barron. His
ordering that his men should he got 10
quarters secretly, without beat of drum,
and his ordering the drum TO desst from
beating when il began 10 bea, contrary 10
his orders, so far from proving him de6ci.
ent IN courage, are considered by the court
as strong evidence Of his GOODNESS and re-
Hcclion at that moment. Indeed ii would
g..
this court, that an officer who exposed him
sell at an open gaogway, under heavy
abd close fire, who being wounded still re.
manned on his deck during the whole az.
tack, giving his orders coolly and d s,incl-
ly, and who neither by his words or aGti
ous discouraged his crew or any part of
it. could be guilty of this charge. Such
the court are satisfied was captain James
Barron's conduct and situation, and howe
yer they may think Of his activity or iudg-
men,, they feel themselves bound to de.
clare that hsj; NOT GUILTY under this
third charge, {" FOR failing TO encourage in
his own person his inferior officers aud
men TO fight courageously."
The fourth and last charge stated in the
warrant Of the honorable Secretary of the
Navy against captain James Barron is in
these words:
s. For not doing his utmost to take or
destroy the Leopard, which vessel il was
his duly 10 encounter"
SPECIFICATIONS,
list. =" In that the said ship Leopard
q did fire upon the said l,ieate Chesapeake,
:" and the said James Barron did fail SUI
"tably to repel said attack"
Cd, In that the said frigaie Chesa.
I" peake was by order Of the said James
" Barron surrendered to the said ship Leo
"pard, ct time when the injuries SIS.
" tanned either on the sad frigate or her
"ctsw did not wake such surrender
T" then necessary"
Sd. =" In that the flag of the said fri.
gate Chesapeake was by order ofihe said
IS j. Barron s;auek tn the said ship Leop ri
"when the guns Of the said frigats Ches
" speake were loaded"
4,h " In that The flag of the said fri
" gate Chesapeake was by order of the
s. SAID James Barron struck to the SAID
" ship Leopard, at a time when the mail,
deck battery THE said frigate Cicsa.
Z" peale was in q situation which would
" have enabled the return of broad side
Z" in very short time"
slh. In that The Gag Of the said fri
gate Chesapeake was by order of the
" said James Barron struck 10 the said
E" ship Leopard. without the said James
{" Barron's having consulted any of his of.
/" iiccrs, as TO whether the flag ought TO
=" be struck or not"
9th. In that the Gag of the said FRI
" gate Chesapeake was by order of the
" sad James Barron struck TO The said
s. ship Leopard, before single gun oil
" any kind was fred from the said fri
"ga,e Chesapeake"
In deciding upon this charge the court
will make the following statements:
lsi. Il appears to the court, that the
said ship Leopard did fire upon the said
frigaie Chesapeake, and that her attack
was not suitably repealed. The codrt are
fIhereioEe Of opinion that this Erst specif
cation is fully proved.
I'd. 1t appears to The court, that the
Nag Of the said frigate Chesapeake was
by order of the said James Barron struck
20 the said ship Leopard. at a time when
the injuries sustained either on the said
frigate OF her crew did not make such q
surrender then necessary. The court are
thetefDfe OF opinion that this second spe.