Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1819-02-25
VOL. Xv.--NU. s5.

| be lnftlcied upon a haiion are So much
| more numerous, and of such different
characters from those which may be i'm.
bicied upon an army, their right is much
more extensive IN this respect than that
OF general. The right is onl, co exten.
s"e WIN The object, and can never ex-
cceu ~. III rs sort of extension of The
g'nerai law fora particular object, and
must be limited by the occasion. The
naiion has The right 10 retaiiaie All ont
RACES committed against the nation: bnf
ihe general only possessing this right for
Tie preservation at himself and his army
against outrage. Mr.. c. would maintain,
without fear OF contradiction, that he
mas only right 10 refaliate tor offences
asarisl The practices of war, conniiied
IN relation IL him or them. The cases
e,e Af ROM aud cur p' oSs Ns hays horn
This docirine OF retaliation, M go TO prove
The same fact They are all instances Of
reiaiaiing upon the enenly some offence
against the ia~s of war, III the persons
OF tifose attached 10 the army. But.
whai are the charges against Arb,uh-
not Is he charged with any violation Of
lie practices OF war, or oil any outrage
against the general or his army No.
SIR, lie is charged with an offence against
The government al The United Siaies.-
And has tins gov rilneni fallen so low
that II cannot protect Itself from injsry
wiillosI the strong arm of military power
10 shield II from The aitae H. of indiN idu-
3is lie doctrine Of retaliation, then,
Will not bear gentlemen uut in the cxecu-s
,ion OF Artbu,iinOt, because lie is charged
with no oil nee for which, the general iiat!
Alright 10 reia!iaie. Again-mot 10 me.,-
ton The ground which has been taken bv
The lionorabie Speaker, oiiIie total inao-
pIieabIiity oil the principles of retaliation
to indiaD warfare, and Viii, II have not
yet heard successfully comtroveSied-in
order 10 justify retaliation, il should be
dec Jared 10 The enemy 10 be so, and The
particular offence for which il is a retalia-
iIon should be announced Had this
been done The charges themselves are
a sufficient answer In His question. Sir.
Of hunian blood We should always be
tender; and, although gentlemen may
say that much benefit may result from
THIS exemplary punishment OF an indivi
dual y lloni they conceive TO have beer.
ni.che,ous, Tins coslniitee cannot wiiih
safety sanction thai doctrine in morals
That evll may be done, ilai good may
come al it..
Bni If gentlemen have recourse 10 iI,e
laws OF nations 10 support Tins dacirine
OF retaliation, let them take the uiiols
law IN relation 10 The subject. New, ii iS
prnciple fairly d,duciblr from thai
law, That In those cases IN which nation
Is compelled 10 resort 10 extraordinary
Fcme0its 10 pioicci herself nom harm,
she is also bound TO resort 10 The mildesf
remedy thai will effect lie object. II.
III u, course can be pointed oui wh;rh
"euld have been mildor tlan Thai pur-
sued, and ahsn every purpose equal
~ wch, that takes away OF Itself all iusii-
iicaiion tor the !,arsher course Now, we
had ArbuihDoi and Ambrister in our
power; hey might have been confined
uniil Tie war Was al Az end and, II they
had violated ilIe laws Of nations With re-
gard 10 The United States, we migII IL
Their have required OF Spain their punisli-
meni, or, II Hey could moi have been
punished. we might Lave Tequir, their
perpetual banishmcUt from HE prov ilee.
as persons lninical 10 us, iomeniers of
war, and dangerous 10 our y ace. This
would have answered every rational pur4
pose OF protection 10 us: and b, tie.
principles Of The laws of nations, Ills is
The course We were bound 10 pursue.
But gam, sir, general Jackson las
undertaken 10 execute this man Tor sup
posed offence against The laws of nations.
10 taking part against us III u war, viiilst
us country aud ours were III state IF
peace. New, moi TO mention HAT his
well established principle" is 10, lie
law OF DaiIons III all, and cannot be sun
ported by amy acknowledged auIheiIiy
on HAT subject, nor the hostility OF this
prlncipic 10 all lie heretofore recei, ed
opinions CT Ills patton, contend that, in
| tins country no violation Of The lass CT
| nations can be punished without an act
ut Congress prescribing that punishment.
| The trainers of our constitution, for The
wisesi reasons, determined thai Tic per.
| SOUS and property Of their citizens should
not be subjected to condemnation. dude,
asysteDI 81 laws not 30 he found iu ,beir
oNn statute book, but fer which they
would have 10 wade through Ire pages OF
| Nallci, Grnilus. land PnGendou: and
which would be as eDiiic ely inaccessible 20
most OF ihem az were The laws OF lie
| Roman iyrani who had them placed npnn
high poles, written III small characters.
| that he might have an opportunity OF sa
| ilatIng his thirst for blood. by iIlsiY jg,in.
rance Of his edicis. They bavc therefore
| declared, ~ tliai constitution, that, Con.
| gress alone shall have The power tD IRE
| scribe the punishment for violations IL
| tie laws at nations thus abroraiiDp ~
once oil HAT code, as far ss il operates
mp0n lie persons AID property OF ind.ti-
dusls. Il fore any man, then, eau be
punished Tor - brsacI, q! those laws, an
acl OF Congress must prescribe II; aatl
will gentlemen iniurm us where Tie eta.
luir Is 10 lie fouNd in which the penalty
Tor tlie offence charged upon Arbuthno1
Is To- be found. Mr.. T.. would apply this
remark also 10 those cases ot retaliation
or severity which had been cited from our
own history, 10 justify this deed They
all occurred before the adoption Of this