American watchman and Delaware advertiser. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1822-1828, 1825-08-12

r.
sist, must be determined by the known or necessary
conditions and consequences of war. Whatever az
these the most comprehensive Specification of the
term may embrace, are necessarily constitutional
and the law OF war, il is called is in many respect.
SO vague, and so dependent upon arbitrary vie OF
necessity or expectancy, to be judged of by hostile
parties, as justified by an infinite and incaleulabe va
rety OF peculiar circumstances. that it scarce fiji,
ni,hes definite or Ineligible rule BY which il NAV
be predicaed of any military operation, that i, is
either constitutional or unconstitutional. The onls
constitutional question, therefore, is, whether the
war itself were, itself authorized that u.s. whether
commenced or carried on by that authority Ia
which the constitution has exclusively delegated
this high power.
This brings US to the consideration OF the second
test, which, it is suggested should be applied 10 my
conduct on the occasion in question --and that is
the law OF nations.
hat branch OF public law which determines the
correlatve rights and duties either OF the hostile
beigcranis, between themselves, or of neut, ais
and bellgerant. between themselves or of allies
or co-belligeranis, as between themselves, consti
tutes vonmlnous code, which is perhaps the theme
OF as much undeterminae cont rovetsy both as 10 its
principles and its authority, any that UNDER
took 10 prescribe rules of human conduct; and il
would scarce be practicable to deduce from it any
definite role applicable the infinitely varied cir
officer might be condemned for a presumed viola
ton OF the law In this case, however il will noe
be necessary TO trouble The Court with any refei-
ence to the more recondite and theoretical definition,
lot general rules because, insofar as my con1ucs
depends for its justification upon such rules it may
be referred to authoritative and practical expos
ton OF them, applicable 10 the particular circum-
stances under which | acted. The rights and du-
ties incidental 10 state Of war. as it affects every
party directly or indirectly concerned have been
the subject OF such frequent and elaborate discus
sion, in our own intercourse with foreign nations
and have received such lucid definition and such
various illustration from most eminent states
men, that We may be said to have complied and
digested. from the best authorities and most en-
lightened views OF the subject, system Of public
law. upon these TOPICS which, if it be generally
adopted by the family Of civilized nations, as the
moral and political infncnce of our example sx-
tends, may at least be received, among our own
citizens supersedng, to every practical purpose
a reference to the more general and less applicable
doctrines OF elementary writer's. Our discussions
with the powers OF Europe. while they were beligs-
rant and we were neutral, have settled for ourselves
the positive rights Of neuras and our more re-
cent discussions and collisions with one Of those pow
ers, while we were belligerant and she neutral, have
equally well settled the positive duties Of neItrals.
The rule to be deduced from the latter, is so much
the more ineligible n its doctrine, and obvious and
practical in its application, since it has grown
of collisions and discussions of the beigerant rights
of the United States, correlaive to the neutra!
duties of this very power, Spain, whose territorial
sovereignty, am charged with having violated and
more especially OF her neutral duties, determin
ed BY the peculiar circumstances of her colonial
dependencies. in one of which the scene OF my
supposed .ransgresson is laid.
! The extern, Of these correative rights and duties
between belligerant and friendly power must be
determined IN great measure by the position OF
the friendly power either as atrictly neutral
co.bellgerant; and how far il may act, not as an
enemy, but as the assistant OF an enemy. l shelf
first consider the third party a mere neutral
The rule for him in that case is, that If, while in
The exercise of sovereign authority, either by conni
vance through mere weakness, he converts his
privileges as neutral to the aid Of the enemy, he
forieis those privileges. They are for the time
suspended, and the beigerant has right to invade
his territory or to seize his shipping these crcum~
stances Justify INVASION or an arrest Of trade and
commerce. For obvious reasons, | shall not cite
foreign authorities in support of this position: it is
written in every page OF the law OF nations in the
forcible language of Mr. Adams I" it is engraved
in adamaDt on the common of mankind
No writer upon the law of nations pretended
to contradct-none OF any reputation or authority
ever omitted to Insert t.o In illustration, shall
only refer to one who may be termed ihs father Of
the law of nations, the venerable Crotus. Here
the learned Counsel qnolcd from Y. 8, p e5 sec. A..
in which he states the right TO attack ship which
has pirates house which has robbers in il, though
some of the innocent may suffer thereby; but adds
that though the right is clear, it Is tp he eSeroised
with view to moral as well as civil obligations,
and with leaning towards moderation and humane
eenes. So far the rights of beihgerants and the
duties Of neutrals confined, and here may be
permitted to fenatk that through the whole course
of conduct for which | am now called to snswer,
have kept FAR within these lmta. Neither the per.
son nor the property Of any innocent person having
been wantoniy injured.
cntna now 10 the lichts nf a hel1rsca towards