The Rhode-Island Republican. [volume] (Newport, R.I.) 1809-1841, 1814-02-10


the world at the same time. But the strongest
advocates for retaliation, have not preteodcd
that il could be Justified until after notice OF
the firs, aggre ssiou, and neglect or refusal 10
repeal il. Upon what principle, then, was
the Order Of Council OF sth January, 1907,
imposed This was bot foTtv-seveu days after
the Berlin Decree, and before we could have
had notice of il and yet Great Britain had
fight, say they, 10 rctalis,e on us for an act
which we could no, prevent, and OF which we
did NOT know u is in vain TO pretend, that
this Order Was not retaliation OF the Berlin
Decree, because less rigorous In terms. IL
was contrary TO the known law Of nations, and
Britain had the power to enforce IL 4; but
France had no power 10 caforce her Decree,
and IL could be considered but an empty threat,
but il is suggested, that this war is for tho
protection Of British scamen. This charge
is without any Foundation. We are contends
ing for the protection OF our own scamen ou
board of our own ships. The law Of nation.
admits not the subjects of one nation 10 enter
on board the ships OF another, and to take
such as shey shall Judge their own. The Case
Is simple, and capable of demonstration. Tho
ocean is the common highwsy Of nations. On
II, each has concurrent, but neither on cx-
elusive jurisdiction. Ii, then, one nation has
a right TO take such as she shall iudge her
own subject in this common jurisdictiou,,ho
other may rctake the same subject, if sh.
Judges him to be her own. IL this nation ha,
a right to rccap,urc, she has, aserfiorf, righr
10 resist the first takiog--so that pursuing.
your principle, one na,icn claiming u citizen
in jurisdiction common 10 both, has right
to take him from anolber, while the other, If
she claims him, has . right to resist. But,
although the jurisdiction is concurrent on the
ocean, II is not so on board ship. Here The
Jurisdiction is exclusive. The municipal law
prevails here. VATrEL Gays, that a person
born an ship board, is considsteA Us the nat
ural born subjec, OF the nation to which tho
ship belonged, because within the exclusive
jursdic,ion OF that nation. II is true thar
there are cases, in which a bclligercnt may
enier ON board for certain purposes for in~
s,an,c, to search for contrsband goods, snd 10
prevent a violation Of blocksde- But these
are exceptions, and go to prove thcNule Il
is nanifes. that these exceptions, especially
than relative TO conlrabsud goods, aFe the ~
\ fec, Of compact. Tbey are psrto( She con-
!. vsnaioasl lAw Of NeIi Iioe<. The ossuvSt lHy
never defined what articles we're contsaband-
These exceptions, 20 stric,ly defined, and
carefully guarded, prove, inconsss'ibly, The
general rule, that each nation has an exclusive
jurisdiction on board It's ships on the ocean.
But to pretend that because there " one ex-
cep,ion, there - therefore another |; that be-
cause ,hs officers of one oa'ion have right
to enter on board the ships of ascther, In search
Of contrabrnd goods, and if they 6nd any that
are suspicious, they have right TO carry ia
the ship for trial |; thar Mer./1vc such ofls.rs
have righ. 10 enter on board and take such
men as they shall Judge their own, rshons
\ trial, is, co0fess, course of scsSoniny which
+ ! do not fully understand, Ifthis ign, exi,r,
why do not gentlemen give W proof OF il !
They are wise and learned in the law OF ma
tions where is the writer on national law,
who has undertaken 10 establish the right of q
nation to enter on board the ships Of another,
and to take such as she muy deem her own,
without submitting the question 10 az inletna-
ticnal tribunal!
But geOtIcmen insinuatc, that British sub
jects, whom we have nsturalixed, are The sub
jcc,s Of conteniipn and they insist on the
doctrine Of perpetual allegiance or at lsast,
that naiuralizcd citizen, has bu, . local pro.
lection. That is, inssmuch as Allegiance and
protection are Reciprocal; and this protection
does not extend beyond the territory OF exclu-
sive urisdiction Of the nslion, SO the silcgisue0
| is subject to tho same Limitation. As q con-
sequence Of this doctrine, a British subject,
nsiurslized here, is ob!igec TO 6gh, against
his native county until he gets three leagues
from the shore, and the momcn, he crosses
this imaginary line, be is absolvcd from bis
allegiance, and obliged TO fight Tor his native
| against his adopted couairy. This eonsequer
alone, is sufficient TO make the psoposition III
die alous. Bu the law has removed every
doubt on this Subject. Naturalization is def
ned, the gi,ing foreigneev the rights of q
ciuzcn or converting a foreigner Into ci'i-
gen. The word itself carries whit ITS own
! definition. Oar own Law has determined i,s
u effect. II was decided in Ncw-York, that it
i operates res,eeffveiy, and places the man in
the same situation As II he hsd always been.
eilizen. The principle is the same in Eng