Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1819-07-30

at considerable lengili.--He denied the
vagueness which was ascribed 10 the law
OF nations on the subject of piracy, and
the other points touched upon. he sup
ported the authority of BynkershoPck.
Vaitel. b. |, ch. 10, had denounced d" all
Villains who, by the quality and habitual
frequency ct their crimes, violate all pub
lie security, aud declare themselves enc
mics at the h"man race. Thus pirates
are brought 10 tire gibbei by the first into
whose hands they fall !" Blackstone, the
Wade mecum OF all lawyers, says, "a pi-
raie Is an enemy OF the humaf race
Even II writer's OF the law oinatious had
adopted different definitions of piracy,
where was the pefniiien oft that would
not embrace the case OF these men hose
lawless depredaiions came up To ass def
milton Off which had ever been given
Alter developing this idea with great force.
and ridiculing the preiension, that had
been sugg, sled, that these men had ihe
right, under fhe commission belonging tn
the Irresistible, to capture Spanish pro-
perry, he returned TO the anals sis Of the
testimony he showed why The Testimony
of &C, ompl,ces SHOULD be received :;
otherwise, The most atrocious "ffencrs
might escape ihimpunity. He conclud-
ed by strong appeal 10 the Jury in favor
ot The law--tbai The honor OF our country
required that the law should be put in
force, against brigands who not only sali-
ed from his waters, TO ,Oi,Ut plunder, but
returned TO them as the scene ,7for liza
partition, and as a sanctuary where they
expected TO escape the punishment of
their crimes.
CHARGE OF THE COURT.
The Court then charg d TIL jury IN sub
stance that the prisoner at the bar was indict.
ed Tor cru'zing on the higb seas without any
commission x boar ding and piundeiing Spa
niSh vessel or vessels belonging to some power
To the jurors unknown, aud practically taking
ont OF such vessel Il sum of money, which The
crew divided among themselves. The essen
tal objects OF enquiry were, whether the prt-
sOner at the bar was engaged in such crnize
without a commission, whether the robbery
charged IN the indictment was committed by
INN and others SO cruizing afO,e said, and
whether the tact amounted TO piracy nuderthe
act of Congress.
The fact of cruizing and plunderug the
Spanish vessel was proved by the testimony of
acconipllces. and ii was contenhed by the
counsel for the prisoner that they were totally
unworthy ofcredit.
1t is undoubtedly true that the testimony of
accomplices is 10 be heard with suspicion and
II their testimony should be improbable or
coutradicted by circumstauc es. or by other tes-
timopy; the jury Nigh lnsiifiabiy discredit il ::
but II all the circumstances of he case circum-
stances which could not be mistake en- or misre-
presented, corrobOrated the testimony of
the accOmpice, and in fact were merely con-
! nected by that testimony, il would be going
too far TO say that the facts supplied by the
witness were TO be disregarded because he was
an accomplice. But in this Case one OF the wit
nesses-Donald, had been acquitted by the
Grand Jury, because he was forced on board
the vessel, and his testimony cOncprred with
that of the other witnesses in all that was
material.
Ii the robbery committed their next
enquiry would be, whether the vessel commit
ting il, sailed under lawful commission.
There was not only no testimony whatever
of commission. but all the facts given in evi-
dence we're totally incompatible with the idea
of sailing under any authority whatever The
crew of one vessel had mutiniea, seized ano-
Their vessel, and proceeded on cru,ze under
officers elected by themselves.
The question whether the case came
within the act of Congress one of more
difficulty. 1t was impossible that the act
could apply to any Case il not TO this The
case was undoubtedly piracy according to the
understanding and practice of all nations. 1t
was a case ia which all nations surrendered
their subjects to the punishment which any
government might infiict upon them, aud one
IN which all admitted the right of ed CHI to take
and exercise jurisdiction. Yet the standard
referred to by the act OF Congress, as express
sed m that act, must be admitted, to lie SO
vague as to allow of some doubt. The writers
the crime OF piracy. Under the doubts arising
from this circumstance, the court recommend.
CD II TO the jury TO find a special verdict
which might submit the law to the more deli
beratc consideration of the court.
The jury retired butfor a few moments,
and brought IN special verdict, similar
TO the one which we have given in full,
below.
A Jury was then impannelled, and the
nF ipRa of rf 4 lo i,,l,
the same indictnen) was with their con-
sent submitted at once 10 trial /: the evil
deuce gone through, and the Jury return
ed the following special verdict
We of the jury find that the Prisoners Bal
~ Durfev, William ChappeIs alias William
Chapel, Daniel Phillips, James Thomas alias
James West, Daniel Livingston, Luke Jack
son, Stephen Sydney, Peter Nelson, I.aac
Sales and Peter Johnston, were in the month
OF March 1919 part OF the crew of IA private
armed vessel called the CreOlla( commissio
by the government of Buenos Ayres, a colony
Then at war with Spaiu,) lying in the port Of
MarEarItta that in the month of March 1919,
the said prisoners and others Of the crew mu-
tined, confined their officers left the vessel
and in the said port of MargaItta seized by
violence a vessel called the Irresistible a Dri-
vate armed vessel living in that port commits
stoned 10y the government of ATtigas vino was
also ar war with Spain that the said prison
eTs and others having so possessed themselves
OF the said vessel the Irresistible, appointed
their officers, proceeded TO sea on a cruize
without any documents or commission what
ever, and while, on that crnize in the mouth
of April 1919 on the high seas, committed tie
offence charged in the indictment by the plum
der aud robbery of the Spanish vessel therein
mentioned. If the plumber aud robbery afore-
said be piracy snder the act of the Congress
Ot the United States, entitled " An act to pTo-
tect the commerce of the United States and
punish the crime of piracy"--lhen We find the
SAID prisoners, severally and respectively, gull
~ /; it the plunder and robbery above stated
be not piracy under the said act of Congress,
then we find them not guilty.
JOHN G.. GAMBLE, Foreman.
The court then adjourned.
Wednesday-Johh Green was put TO the
bar under the Ist Indictment The do