The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1810-10-12
From, the London Courier .4ug. 4.
PR1vY COUNCIL APPEALS.


On Saturday the Lords Commissioners of
Appeals in Prize causes finished their sit.
tings for the session, and previous 10 their adj
Iournment, they gave judgment in various re-
served cases of great importance. One of
them especially, which we have pleasure in
reporting was of the greatest. interest to the
friends OF liberty and humanity, and It's de
cision was such as we doubt not will give
great and equal satisfaction in this Country
and America.
Case o/,the Hmedie, James Johnson. mas
ter.
This was a vessel under American colors
with stores from Africa, captured in Dec.
1907, in the West Indies, and carried into
Iortola. The claimant pretended that she
was bound 20 Charleston, South Carolina,
where the importation of slaves continued to
be lawful to the end of that year but hav-
ing been detained on the coast, and there
being no prospect of reaching Charleston be
fore che first day OF January 1903, the peri.
cd appointed for the Cessation of the S ave
Trade IN every part of the U. S by a law Of
the general Congress, the master of necessi-
ty, bore away for the Island Of Cuba, there
to wait orders from his owners.
1t was commended on the other hand by the
captor, that this statement was a mere pre-
tence, and that in truth the original plan of
the voyage was destination to Cuba, which
was unlawful, under the American laws, long
previous to their general abolition OF the slave
Trade.
Admitting however, the case so told. il
was stenuously contended for the claimant.
that British Court of Prize had no right to
take any cognizance of American municipal
law, q as no beiiigerent right Of this Country
had been violated, the property ought TO be
restored to the neutral owner. A series
of presidents seemed to support this doc.
trine.
The ship was condemned at Tortola, and
the enslaved Africans were, according to our
abolition act, restored to their freedom but
the claimant appealed, and the liberty of
the Africans, as well as the property of
the ship, depended on the issue of this ap-
peal.
The case was solemnlX argued in March
last, and as In the opinion of the court, il
turned on the new question, of the effect of
the American and British Abolition Acts on
this species of contraband commerce, when
brought before a Court of Prize, the case
on account of its Importance, has Since
stood over for judgment-Several other
OF American slave ships have also stood
over as depending on the same general ques-
ton.
On Saturday the judgment of the Court
was delivered by Sir William Grant, the
master OF the Rolls, nearly in the following
terms:
"This ship must be considered as being
employed at the tune of capture, in carrying
slaves from the coast of Africa TO Spanish
colony. We think that this was evidently
the original plan and purpose of the voyage,
Notwithstanding the pretence set up to veil
the true intention. The claimant, however,
who is an American, complains of the cap
a IT. Il
properly, of which he alledges that he has
been uDjustly dispossessed.
"ln all the former cases of this kind
which have come before this court, the Slave
Trade was liable to considerations very diff
ferent from those which belong TO it now. 1t
had at that time been prohibited Gas far as
respected carrying slaves to the colonies of
foreign nations) by America but by our own
laws it was still allowed. 1t appeared to us,
therefore, difficult to consider the prohibi-
tory law OF America in anysother light than
as one OF those municipal regulations of
foreign State of which this court could not
take any cognizance.
'But by the alteration which has since "a
ken place the question stands on different
grounds and is open to the application OF
very different principles The Slave Trade
has now been totally abolished by this coun-
try, and our Legislature has pronounced il
to be contrary to the principles Of Justice
and humanity. Whatever we might think
as individuals before, we could not, sitting
as Judges IN British Court of Justice, "a
gard tile trade in that light while our own
laws permitted it. But we can now assert,
that the trade cannot abstractedly speaking
have legitimate existence.
When l say abstractedly speaking. I
mean that this country has no right to con.
troll any foreign Legislature that may think
fat 10 dissent from this doctrine, and TO per-
NIT to its own subjects prosecution of this
trade; but we. have now right to affirm
that TRINA jacie the trade is Illegal, and
thus TO throw on the claimants the burden
Of proof that, in respect Of them, by the au
thofity OF their own laws, it Is otherwise.
AS the case now stands, we think we are
Untitled to say, that claimant can have no
right upon principles Of universal law, to
claim the restitution in Prize Court ofhu-
man beings carried as his slaves. lie must
shew some right that has been violated by
the capture, some properly of which he has
beea dispossessed, and TO which he ought to