Alexandria gazette & daily advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1817-1822, 1819-08-04

exercise OF their CONSTITUTIONAL powers, anu
make rule which might be understood by
| the judiciary OF the country? Iflhey failed
in doing their duty, it was their own
look out 1; but surely no jury would take
upon themselves to say by their verdict the
law had been defined when it was not !; or
upon such vague. general expressions, take
the life OF fellow citizen.-The counsel
by way of analogy attempted to show that
| if congress had referred to other cases as
defined ~ the law Of nations, as territorial
jurisdiction. the right ot search, DC now
| discordant the writers, and how unsettled
The doctrines are upon these subjec's-hen
too, highly distinguished in this country,
had differed upon the definition OF piracy.
The gentleman who presided in that court,
had in another place Tin congress IN the
case of Jonathsn Robbins, declared That
not only an actual robbery, but cruizing on
the high seas, without a commission, ana
with intent to rob, was piracy.-Whereas,
now, the u. States attorney says actual
robbery is necessary to constitute the OF
! fence. Reference was also had TO the con-
s,itution by which congress is to define p'-
racies and felonies committed on the high
Seas, s. offences against the law OF nations,
to show, that the former are distinguished
from the latter. as if not ranked among "the
offences agains. the law OF nations. = he
evidence was then anaized, and comment
ed ONT was the testimony OF accompil-
ces always suspicious) and here brought
from the duresse OF a Jail, tax ne ITS color
from the hopes and fears OF the witnesses.
1t was attempted to be proven that they
had contradicted themselves, and each o.
Their; that there was no satisfactory evil
dence of this being Spanish vessel as
charged in the indictment 4; that this act OF
congress was passed but ten days before
they left Margarita they COULD MT haze
known OF it /; and therefore il is as TO them
in the light Of an er post Jacto law, &c.
&c. A particular and pathetic appeal was
| made in favor of Poole, who had served
gallautIy in the navy of his country dul ing
| the late war.
MIR. Sianard replied 10 both gentlemen
| at considerable length. He denied the
| yagueness which was ascribed to the law OF
nations on the su ject of piracy, and the
other POINTS touched upon. He supported
the authority OF Bynkershoeck. Vattel, b.
q, Oh. l9, had denounced !" all villains
who, by the quality and habiiual trequen-
cy of their crimes, violate all public secu-
rib, and declare themselves enemies OF
the human race. Thus pirates are brought
to the gibbet by the first into whose hands
they fall J" Blackstone, the Wade mecum
OF all lawyers, says, "A pirate is an enc
my of the human race" Even if writers
on the law Of nations had adopted differ
ent definitions of piracy, where was the
definition of it that would not embrace the
case of these men--whose lawless depre-
dations came up TO any definition OF it
which had ever been given After '.eve-
Looping this idea with great force, and rldl-
culing the pre,ensions, that had been sug-
gested, that these men had the right, IN
der the commission belonging 10 the Ire
sislable, to capture Spanish property, he
returned to the analysis OF the testimony ;
he showed why the testimony OF accomPh-
ces should be received otherwise the most
atrocous offences might escape with lmpu'
nifty. He concluded by astrorg appeal to the
Jury in favor of the law-that The honor OF
our country re quired that the law should
be put in force, against brigands who not
only sailed from its waters, to collect
plumber, but returned to them as the scene
for its partition, an AS sanctuary where
they expected to escape the punishment OF
their crimes.
CHARGE OF THE COURT.
The Court then charged the jury IN SUD-
stance, tina, the prisoner at The bar was
indicted TO, crlizing ON the high seas with
out any comm ssion, and boarding and
plundering Spanish vessel or vessels be-
longing to some power to the Jurors I'M
known, and practically taking out OF such
vessel SUN of money, which the crew
divided among themselves. The essential
objects of enquiry were, whether the prl-
soEer at the bar was engaged IN such cruise
without commission, whether the robbie