Alexandria gazette & daily advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1817-1822, 1819-01-15
From tie National htelligeneer.

SEMINOLE WAR, &c.
Mr.. II. NJ. Nelson, from the committee
on military affairs, delivered in the follow
ing report:
'The committee on military affairs, to
whom was referred that part of the Presi-
dents message ,ofthe 18th November 1918,
which relates to the proceedings of the
court martial, in the trial of Arbuthnot and
Ambrister, and TO the conduct OF the war
against the Seminole Indians, report:
That after perusal OF the various docu-
ments submitted 10 Congress, on the SUBJ
ject of the Seminole war. they find much
difficulty in separating the responsibility of
the commanding officer, to his government,
from the obligations of the United States to
Spain: bat, as the occupation and capture
OF Pens tcola, and ST. Marks, are subjects of
negotiation and correspondence, at this
time between the two governments, and as
the committee on foreign relations will pro
baby, consider this par, of the Presidents
message more immediately connected with
their branch of TIE subject, your committee
will confine themselves, in this report. 10
the trial and execution of Alexander Ar.
buthnot md Robert C. Ambrister.
On the 96Ih April, 1918, general order
issued q. head quarters, fort ST. Marks, by
major general jackson, signed by colonel
Robert Butler, a,jutant general, detailing
"a special court martial, ITO meet atlo o'clock
A, VI. for the purpose of investigating char
ges exhibited against A. Arbuthnot, r. C.
Anihrister, and such others who are SINH
iarly situated as may be brought before it,"
Your committee do moi deem il necessa-
~ to attach TO their report the proceedings
OF that court, as every member OF The house
has been furnished with several copies, TO
which reference can be made.
Your committee can find no law of The
q. States, authorising trial. before mill
tary court, for such offences as are alledged
against Arhuthnot and Ambrist.r, Except
so much of the second charge, as charges
Arbutbnot with ''acting as spy" Of which
part ofthe charge the court found him 'not
guilty. nor in the opinion of your commit
tee does any usage authorise, or exigency
appear from the documents accompanying
the re FORT OF the trial. which can Justify the
assumption and exercise of power By the
court martial, and the commanding general,
on this occasion, It's admitted, as maxim
OF the law of nations, that, when the war is
with savage nation which observes no
rules, and never gives quarter, we may pu-
nIsh them in TIE person of any of their
people. whom we may take, (belonging to
the number q them, and endeavor by this
rigorous proceeding to force them to re-
spect the laws Of hGmanity. Whereyerse-
verityi is not absolutely necessary, mercy
becomes duty. In vain has your commit
tee sought among the documents on the sub
ject of the Seminole war for shadow of
necessity for the death of the prisoners ar
raigned before The court The war was at
an ead TO all iDtents and prrpoSes-the ena-
my's strong holds had been Destroyed
many Of them killed or taken prisoners and
the remainder feeble band, dispersed and
scattered in every direction. The Spanish
fort Of ST. Marks, which it was supposed,
(and no doubt justly had protected them,
was also in our possession, and SO entirely
was the war considered to be terminated,
that the Georgia militia. under gen. Glass
cock, had returned to taeir homes. Then
where was the absolute necessity which alone
could warrant departure from the exer-
else of that clemency, Of which the United
States has heretofore SO Justly boasted?
Your committee find, in the general or
der Of the e9th April, 10 which general
Jackson orders the execution of Arbuthnoi
and Anbrister, this remarkable reason, in
tended as justification of the executions,
principally of Ambrister, but applying TO
both Arbuthnot and Amhrister: 1T is an
established principleo OF the law Of nations,
that,any individual of a nation, making war
against the citizen of another nation, they
being at peace, forfeits his allegiance, and
becomes an outlaw AMI a pirate 1t may
he asked by what sys!ela of Interpretation
the offences charged could be considered
aspiracies, which imply in common accep-
tation. offences upon,he high seas, Of which
the court could not assume cognizance