Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1819-01-07

OF tfidi,
mean to meet you fairly upon your
own ground, and 10 resolve this question
by an appeal 10 anthorily, and (wbat is
'norc) 10 Tie very authority TO which yon
refer.
General Jackson asserts, in general
terms, as lIis oven src,gii az Justification
oi hts conduci, that Ill IL an. established
principle of the law of nations, that
:" any Individual of a nation, making war
+" a2ainStil,c citizens OF any other nation,
They being al peace, foriri,s his allie
glance, and becomes AN outlaw aud a
pirate" lbelicyv, that moi one man in
this patton, has had The iiarslil,uod 10 at
tempt defence OF The General upon his
own principles. Why have you passed
by this ground Of defence, IN utter ST.
!ence? Ii is TOO remarkable to have es
capped your attention. Oh your opinion
can have no doubt. You know, Mat q
person. nrho Joins an enemy aud rights az his
cause, as 20 DC considered and ireqted as On
enemy. This is the whole OF iiie law OF
naiions on the subject. You owed 1t, sir.
In Yourself, 10 your government, your
country, and your Gud, 10 express, pub.
licly, your decided Misrepresentation Of tins
novel, preposierous and dangerous doc
trinc.
Abandoning General Jacksons. law of
nations, and, doubtless, approving in yomr
heart, The general voice or that subject
YOU have placed his Justification on en-
tIreiy different grounds, which he proba
ply never even Thought of. Yet, la a case
hke THIS, the ratification. to BE- satisfactory,
o"ghtto be patpnbie. You say, That Con.
temdnS with such enemies" as the Semi
noIes, although humanity revolis a,
entire retaliation upon iheni, and spares
" the lives OF their Feeble ant. defenceIess
women and children, yet mercy herself
" surrenders TO relribulve justice, The
/" Inv OF Their leading warriors taken in
arms, and still morc the lives of foreign
white ncendiaries, who, disowiicd by
TIER own governments, aud dIsowning
: their own natures, degrade themselves
beneath The savage charact y, by va
F" luuiarily descending 10 lis level" And
To prove, that " hs Is the usage Of lrgi,-
male warfare, Won qao'e two passages
from pdffef, which seem 10 support lie
proposition, only because you have omit
TED to quote The context necessary 10 ex-
PLAIN the authors meaning. Nor can.
account for the manner of these uuata-
'Ions, more chariiabIy or respectfully 10
wards you, than by supaosiug, ,i,a, YOU
felt The oppression Of this part of four
subject, and were in TOO much liaSie and
anxiety 10 dispose ni il, toexamine it with
patience. l have little else 10 perform
but the dull work of quoting the whole of
these passages.
One Of your quotations from Vmfclis
In these words: "As a General has the
night OF sacrificing The lives Of his enc
MES to MS own safety or that of his
. people, il he has TO contend with an in
human enemy, often guilty of such ex
cesses, lie may take the lives oi .ome of
ms prisoners, and treat them as his own
people have been treated" Now, lei
The whole passage be laid before the pnb-
lie. Speaking OF ia kind ofrctoriion some
times practised III war, under The name of
repfsais, panei says, " if General of
The enemy has, without aRV lust reason,
caused some prisoners TO be Ranged, "a
like number OF his men, and Off same
rank, will he hung ny, signfying 10 linn,
y thu thas retaliation nil be continued fo,.
" o6hgiag him 20 observe tie lars of ,gnr.-
y" 1t Is sad extremity thus TO put a pri-
soner 10 death for his Generals fault.
" and II this prisoner before was promised
his iiie. reprisals cannot be made on
" hun will, any color OF justice. YET, az
prince has right Of sacrificing The
: lives of his enemies TO his safety, and
" that OF his men, if he is engaged with
an inllnman enemy, who frequently
" commits such cnornitirs, he appears
= 10 have right Of refusing life 10 some
" OF The prisoners he may take, and of
" treating them as bis were treated. But
" Scipio's humanity is rather to be imiiat-
ed" And then follow some historical
illustrations, according to iiic manner Of
tbs author. shall resort 10 our own his
tory for an illustration. But let il be first
observed, that notice OF The retaliation
must be gwen TO the enemy; conse-
qnen'ly, The retaliation is only unsuitable
EogFGnfe beio. twas upon this principle
that General Washington acted when he
caused Sir Charles Asgill TO be designated
by lot, as the victim of just and neces
sary retaliation for the excesses commit
ted by bis enemy. Whether that case be
at all similar III principle 10 the present !;
whether General WasIiuglon's couduci
III regard 10 Sir Charles Aseill, be in the
least like General Jackson's proceedings
against Arbuihnoi and Ambrister in
tine, whether The passage YOU have quot.
Ell rom Vdttef be IN any manner opposite
TO your purpose; let the good sense of
the public decide. General Jackson had
already sacrificed Two victims 10 this no.
hey OF retaliation: on the 9th April, 1918,
he wrote To Tie secretary of war, that
Francis or Hills lIago and Hemattle-
mIco' Qlillls Hadio and EamaihIi Niece,
as YOU write their names) had been
hung; The latter commanded The party
who so inluman'y, sacrificed Scott and
ms companions lie assigns no particu.
lar reason for hanging Hills Hago. In
'rn'h, almost every one OF the few Semi
uole warriors he could ind, whether they
made or were IN a condition 10 make re-
slslance or not, were pui to death. This
looks more like determination than retail.