Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1818-10-02

4 =
| her own territory. She has made vari
Gus attempts To extend her power over In
Banda Oriental. Sometimes, she * AN
noyed by the troops OF Arti.as--at oile
| times. she has made advances upon him
which he has bravely and successful,
resisted. a fierce contest is at this mo
meht raging between them. Portugal ha
| taken one Town by ireacherv; and. it /
| impossible 10 say what the neNi account
may b'ing TO us.-Ar,igaS is also "a, ia.
| gers draw with Pueyrredon-and ,hcr,
lSsome talk :" OF an active Coalition iorniIn.
between the Portuguese troops and tlos,
OF Brencs Ayres."
Aril3as Is thus AT open nor with Poriu.
gal. lie is al liberty 10 capture her YES
sciS; and she his vessels. IL Is presumed
HAT some adventurous spirits, awaiting
themselves OF these circumstances, have
sought aud accepted commissions from
Arilgas 10 c.u'ze against Portuguese YES
seS. The field OF enterprise ana oil boo
~ is thus enlarged. The cruzers OF
Ariiga moi only crulze against Spain, but
Portugal: Whereas, Buenos Ayres, not
being al war with Monte Video, issues no
commissions against Portugal, and her
flag OF course CONVEYS Ito authority 10
cruize against her cargocs. IliiS is one
reason, perhaps, why certain cruiz-rs ar
underline commission of Ar,isaS, rather
than Of Pueyrredon.
great question here presents itself
Are snch expeditions ON Tie pari of our
Own citizens, lawful and legitimate? Are
they such rs Americans ought 10 encou-
rage I'll the question merely we're, is it
right for those who are under The imriS-
dlction O! Arligas, to engage IN them /?
are their prizes good will our courts re-
spcct ms commissions there can be We
~ little doubt that such questions wnnld
be answered lin the a,hrma'ivc.-Bui.
when.we throw q new feature into these
Transactions, when ii is our own citizens.
who resort TO his commission, then the
question becomes more complicated and
more delicate. In the cases now pending
before the courts Of the u. St.ics, t'rr,e
questions will be settled May they be
fixed upon the immutable laws OF i,islicci
May we equally respect The rights OF an
oppressed people struggling for liberty,
and tie Difference which Is due hv our
own citizens 10 The property Of nations
with whom we are al peace.
1hese questions also may come into
view IN tue pending eases Nav not the
goods taken out OF Portuguese vessels,
be coma tfde Spanish goods. covered I'M
der Portuguese bottom? Have all of the
goods taken from The Portuguese, been
fairly adiudged and condemned by a
court at admiralty, before they are dis
posed at by The captor! leave these aud
other questions 10 the courts of nv couu-
try-satisiying myself with reminding tie
reader, that the following are The most IN
terestlng points touching these cases
WHICH have been decided by The Supreme
Court of the United Siaies.-They were
decided last March, in the case of tie Uni
tell States against Palmer and Others brought
up from Boston. This was an Indictment
(says the n. Inielligeucer,) for piracy
against the prisoners, charging them with
having robbed Spanish vessel on the
high seas" The capture was made under
The flag and commission of Buenos
Ayres.
The majority of The Court were of opinion
LIST. That robbery committed on lhe high
seas, although such robbery, if committed on
land, would not, by the laws of the q. States.
be punishable with death is piracy under the
eth section OF the ACT of 1850, for tue punish
ment OF certain crimes against the IT, States.
(under which the prisoners were indicted land
that the Circuit Court has jurisdiction Of The
offence.
IL IS understood that Judge JOHNSON dis
scented from this opinion.
I'd. The Court were unanimously of ooinion
that the crime Of robbery mentioned i'm the act
OF lt9t, Is the crime of robbery, as recOruiz-
ed aud defined at common law.
81. mat the CRIME of robbery, committed
by person on the high seas on board of a
vessel belonging exclusively To subjects of a
foreign state. or persons within vessel be-
longing also exclusively TO subjects of q 10.
reign state, - not piracy within the true in
tent and meaning of the act of i70J; and is
not punishable IN the courts OF the United
States
ith. That when acivil war RACES in a foreign
nation, one part OF which separates itself from
ne oi" tdS'ished government, and ereciS it,
set Into distinct government, the courts of
tie Union must view such newly constituted
government aHd u is viewed by the legislative
and executive departments of the D. States
government. IL Tie government sf The Union
TeNaiuS DcutraI, but recognizes the p isteure
OF a civil war, the courts OF The Union could
not consider as criminal those acts of hosti-
Hty which war authorizes, ard which theuey
government may direct against its enemy
9th. nat, IN general, the same testlmonv
which would be sufficient TO prove that A veg
sci or person is in the service of an ackpov
lodged stale, must be admitted TO prove that
vessel or person is in the servic. of such
newly erected government.
9th. That The seal OF such newly erected
government cannot he allowed TO proye itself
but MAY be pro ed by such testimony as tie
nature OF The case admits. And the TACT that
a vessel or person IS in the service Of such go.
verDment may he established otherwise should
1t be impracilcable TO prove The seal.
Tie Aurora has been in the habit Of censur-
ing ie President for not recognizing the pa.
triOts OF SOaih America ; and II we mistake
not, has dFelt with particular emphasis on his
indifference towards the government of i3ue-
nos AyreS. The Aurora is now busiIy employ
ed III decrvlng the government Of BuenOs
Ayres, the only state which seems 10 have es.
tabiished its ludependenCe--& in representing
its Director PUeyrredon as completely addict.
ed 10 nonarclIlcal principles. Aitigas IS The idol
Of the day. Under such circumstances, what
course would the AnrOra recommend TO the
Executive at tl,S country? Does il advise us
to recognize the government OfBuenOs Ayres