Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1825-11-29

seizure (see his instruc,ons.)
I'd. The captor nigh, also. by looking a, the pa
pers rendered to him by the Captain of the Ninfa
Catalina, have distinctly ascer,ained that she
duly esistered rs trading ship, and had regular
SubordO or freight list OF eli the goods ON board.
and documents indicating their owners and desiina-
ton.
3L lie nigh, also have learned that the vessel
could moi be practically employed as She had engag
twelve passengers, and had ten on bosrd these men
were admitted 20 he passengers,as they were imme
diaely after reanded at the Havana eight ofthem
at least were relanded, two chose to remain behind,
and to encounter any danger rather than abandon
their property. Surely these men. thus admit ed 10
be passengers ought to have ptotected the Nnla
Catalina from suspicion; and if the fact that they
were passengers was not sufficient, as il is believed
TO be they could have given to the capor abundant
TO believe that the vessel was not piratical
vessel.
4th. A man by the name OF Gorgol, belonging
to the Ninfa Catalina, was ordered and conduct ed
on board the Spark. He was the only person be-
longing 10 the Ninfa Catalina to whose identity
Howell would swear forming one Ct the crew of
the piratical vessel. But after being ON board he
was not interrogated.-If Intercepted, lie would,
besides indicating sources OF decisive information
easily accessible, have said, he has since sworn
that Howell had addressed him on board the Ninia
Catalina in port at the Havana, and asked him
dismissed without interrogation. There were other
circumstances claiming the attention of the cap,or,
but these will be called out in noticing the other
facts combining, as the captor's counsel contended
to prove probable cause.
2. The second fact relied on in relation to this
point is, that the Nnfa Catalina sailed from Cuba
the head quarters of piracy and pirates. The force
OF this consideration is, perhaps, more than coun-
terbalanced, by the obvious fact that the pratcal
he
of Havana could not have been equal TO one-tenth
OF those honestly engaged in trade.
On this, az well as every other topic In this part
of the case, mean to say, was before n,imated
that no correct opinion could be formed by the
capor, be formed by any person now, with
out taking view of all the circumstances accessi-
bic TO the captor, if he had used the time of the
capture, ordinary intelligence and industry; and
such as his instructions distinctly required
3. 1t was strenuously contended that the arms
on board the Nnfa Catalina indicated her piratical
character and destination. Now il is certain that
the captor could know nothing of the armament of
the snip, except that he that she appeared 10
have on deck single long gun; which it as fair
to consider as placed there Tor defence against Co
lomban prvateers, as for The attack of defenceless
traders. He knew nothing about it, and he tho't
nothing about it. The deposition of of the prize
officers states, that the object of the Captain, in
sending persons on board the Ninia Catalina, was
merely to ascertain whether she was the ship that
had committed the aggression on the Nancy Flea
nor. Whether there armed crew on board
was not subject OF enquiry; nor does it appear,
except from the deposition OF Mr. Whitlle taken in
May last that there any arms on board, ex-
cept az few cutlasses and good many Spanish
" knives" not a gun, however, except the nine
FOUNDER.
1t is not little singular that limited as were the
enquiries OF the captor, Circumstance was forced
upon his observation and knowledge, which of
itself sufficient TO have convinced HIM that the Ninla
Catalina was not, and, indeed, could not be then
practically employ ed. See the deposition of MIR.
Willie. &C The fitness and equipments of the
Nina Catalina were so deficient that the prize
y" oihcers, alter taking possession of the Nina
- Catalina, had 10 send on board for or more
= new coils of rigging to navigate her to the U.
" States Was not this fact of itself SUFFICIENT 10
warn the captor that this vessel could not possibly
have been intended for those rapid and perlous
movements on the deep, always necessary whether
engaged in flight in pursuit?
4. 1t was contended, that the number of men on
board justified suspicion of piratica destination.
Leaving out the persons admitted to be passengers
only, taking the original Ro! Equipage, and then
estimating the force necessary to navigate schoon-
er OF one hundred and ninety tons, the number OF
The officers and seamen is reduced within such
row limits to deprive this argument of the influ-
be Observed that on this point it does not appear
that the captor had obtained desired any 1forma-
ton
8. 1t was urged that the Ninfa Catalina came
out OF port Immediately after the Spark sailed with
her convoy Although it was admitted that the
course Of the Ninfa Catalina, indicated by her pa
pers, was the same with that of the convoy, and
that she might expect protection, if not from
Colombian privateeTs, at Least from prates yet this
sailing after the convoy, although immediate, is
represented as an evidence of pratical intention
to take the earliest opportunity OF making prize
from the convoy
This argument is believed to have been not only
answered but to have been converted to the vndi-
cation of the Ninfa Catalina. The Nancy Flea
nor one of the convoy. little piraical attempt
aIledged have been made on her had actually pro-
ceeded from the Ninfa Catalina it would have
been not folly, but madness in the Captain have
presented himself before his accuser, under the
immediate eye of power, which it impossi-
bic for him TO resist or to escape power express
ly created for the prevention and extirpation of
piracy. The captor ought to have been admonish-
ed by this very circumstance that his iniormers
must have been, and at any rate, might have been,
mistaken.
6. 1t was finally urged that flight was an evil
dence of guilt; and that the Ninfa Catalina when
hailed by the Spark, attempted TO escape. ALI the
depo-itions, except the deposition of Mr.. white
are silent this subject. He says that the Ninfa
&c Catalina, when hailed, altered her course and
g appeared to be endeayoring 10 get back to Ha-
" vsna." The fact that the Ninfa Catalina was
near enough to be hailed by a ship of war able to
sink her by a single broad-sde, is conclusive that
she could not have attempted to get back. II there
was an appearance of such an attempt it was an
appearance only.
There are other circumstances in this case which, |
under my present impression, it is not necessary 10
state in detail. One of these circumstances was
not known to the Captor; but he ought to have