Alexandria daily gazette, commercial & political. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1808-1812, 1811-09-26


oort of her true destination, and relative to her
return cargo, which at that time 1t was laWiui
for her to return and take in at Sicily.
1t should be kept in view also, that II none
of these motives had existed, the situation IN
which this vessel was, after being at sea ~
DAYS, compelled the captain to enter this port,
for they had no water on board. And let 1t De
remembered too. that she only entered Plef-
mo for this object, that she only remained here
a sufficient time to obtain it and that she sail
ed from thence without having engaged In
any traffic, and without having as we have as
serted, opened her matches. This truth ne
cessarily results from the circumstance OF the
whole cargo, laden at New York, having been
found iientically, at the dlscharging, on board
at Leghorn. And in fact this results also from
the papers on board, the authenticity OF which
cannot be disputed.
The American consul at Palermo, in GER
tifcate delivered to Captain Williams, the
18th December, the day of his departure, at
tests that the ship departs from Palermo with
the whole of her primitive cargo, without
having opened her matches and also that the
cargo still remains as before, for account and
risoue of the owners in New-York, and that
there had not been the least part of 1t Sold
This paper is among the others laid before
the Council. We shall produce another
which is not less positive, in which the cap
tain of the port of Leghorn attests that there
has been deposited at the health Office, GER
ti6cate from the board Of health at Palermo,
in which it is declared that Captain Williams,
arrived in this last port on the 9Th December,
that he sailed from it again before having com
pleted the quarantine prescribed OF fourteen
days, and without having been admitted to an
entry. From all these facts, it follows that
the Jersey entered Palermo, only to obtain
supplies; that Captain Williams neither en-
tered into any kind of traffic, nor had any in
tention of doing SO. This consideration would
suffice to turn from the Jersey the effects of
this decree, if the conditions oft were apph.
cable to her case. But right speaks not less
favorably than the facts, and we shall prove
that the decree in itself is not applicable.---It
is not because the ship sailed from New-York
80 days before the PRONUNCIATION of the decree,
and IS days before the orders of England Of
the ! 18th November and that of consequence
the decree could not be either known or ex-
pected. However decisive this circumstance
may be to the claimant who has no other to
urge, we may pass by it, for we have another
still more decisive-It is this, before the ea'-
tstcnce Of the decree the ship entered the fort
prohibited 6yit-This circumstance alone de-
monstrates the inapplicability of the decree,
because the treaty of the year provides, in
accordance with the laws of nations, I" that
no vessel of one or the other nation, entering
aport or place, before they shall have been
actually blockaded, besieged or invested by
the other, shall be prevented from departing
with her cargo. But this circumstance ofthe
anterior entrance in the port prohibited, is
not the only one that demands the entire re-
stitution of the Jersey. 1t will be recolected
also that it was before the existence of the de
cree, of the 18th December, that the ship
Quilted Palermo to continue her voyage to
I.eghorn. After the principal which we have
Just cited from the Treaty, " that a neutral
shall be permitted to depart from an inter-
dicted port, when she has entered before the
inrerdiction," we must absolve the Jersey
having entered nine days before the interdic-
ton, if even she had been captured to-day
coming from that port. How then is it posi-
BILE to condemn her, when it is besides prov
ed that she even left that port before the pro-
hibition To pretend this, it is necessary to
say that a port may be prohibited before the
prohibition that is to say you may confscate
every vessel, no matter how many months or
years before, which shall have frequented one
of the ports, that has been recently prohibited :
to combat this paradox would be to abuse the
patience of the council, and insult human rea-
son itself. Letus say then, that independent
ly of the motives which led this ship to Paler-
mo, the inapplicability of the decree of the
18th December, rests upon triple evidence,
that is inapplicable because it could not be
known, because the vessel entered Palermo
before the Introduction because in fine she
left that port also before the Introduction. We
have already proved that none of the preced-
ing DEGREES, had been or could be violated by
her There exists then no one pretext for
the seizure of this neutral property.
In order to give an idea of the loss caused
by this measure, in what regards the expense
of the vessel only, we shall show you the ex-
pence ola single month The sum is consi-