Martinsburg gazette and public advertiser. [volume] (Martinsburg, Va. [W. Va.]) 1826-1833, 1828-01-03
whole No. l409.

sentence agains, .7r6afhnst Vas unius, in poins
OF fact.
Arbuthnot was found guilty by the coufe
martial, on two charges: lst OF melting tho
indians to var agsinst the Cuited States, he him.
self being British subject and his nation at
peace with ouui I'd. OF aiding. sbetting and
comforting the enemy. supplying them with
the means OF war II will hardly be believed.
that the only rrouf adduced, applicable TO the
first ut these two charges, was, the evidence of
John Winslet. detailing the contents Of le,tes
the witness had interpreted for an Indian Chief
called Little Prince, which the witness said waz
signed by a MIR. Arhuthnot without stating that
IL was signed BY the Arbutbnot who stood ao-
cused, though Il appears he was acquainted with
his band writing, aud the evidence Of William
Hsmbiy (Arbuthnot's known and mortal encs
my that the witness bad been fold by tie indGns,
that Arbui hnot had ins'igsted them 70 war A.
gainst the U. States, and to the murder and
plumber of our citizens. When the public 10
informed. that the rules of evidence are the
same IN courts martial. as those that prevail i'm
courts Of law, it will be at no loss 10 make .
fair estimate OF the merits Of this conviction
Asto the second charge (discardng the hesrsay
evidence OF the same W. Hambly) the principal
proof of the charge was drawn from the pri.
soner's own correspondence, and some other
documents. / say, confidently, that those pa.
pers contain not the least proof. that he ever
melted the Indians to offensive war, or aggrss-
sion of any kind, against the United States %
their citizens; they relate TO measures Of dee
fence and prevention against aggression upon
the Indians. Far from instigating them TO wars
he manifestly considered their utter ruin o tho
certain consequence OF . WAT with the United
States. He labors, therefore, 10 Impress
upon their minds, upon he British minister -
Washington, and on other correspondents, fhae
the encroachments of our citizens were me-
count ma iced by the President. In his whole
CORE spondence there Ia not to be found ono
word stronger than the following letter to our
Indian Agent. General Mitchell, OF January 10.
l8l6:--s'ln taking the liberty Of addressing you
sir, in behalf Of he unfortunate Indians, believe
me ! have no wish but TO see an end put to .
war, which if persisted 10. ! forsee muse
eventually be their ruin; and, ~ they are nos
the aggressors, If in the heighs OF their rago
have committed any excesses. that you over.
look them, as the JUS, ebuiIs,ons Of an indignant
spiri, against an invading too" II il ,rue~h4
was The organ or the instrument VI the Indiax1
appeals to the officers lot his own and tho
Spanish governments, of their applications foo
protection in what they deemed their juso
rights, and Of their remonstrancss To our own
Indian agents, against pss' or anticipated injury
and oppression. Ii IL possible too, that h0
supplied them with some scanty munitions of
war; though mercIful Court would have
inferred, tha, n,ne kegs Of powder end 500
pounds Of lead, were imported by on Indian
trader. as a supply for hunging, not tor wss.
That he took deep interest in the afisirs a
this devoted race; that he dsplored thci1
miserable condition; hat he regarded then1
as his fellow crestuves; and was DESTROYS and
active to save them from utter extirpation; %
these ,,ncl,isfian crimes Gas Gen. Jackson con.
slders tbem,') he was certainly guilty. Tho
General regards him rs secret agent OF tho
British government, and thinks that government
was well advised of his proceedings think
il very probable !. but that would prove
not his guilt bu. his innocence. II would provo
that IL was not the individual, but the British
gov ,rnment that had wrongee ~, if any wrenG
had been done. lis subject could be guilty %
no fault in following its orders. Every subjccA
or citizen owes obedience to his government;
except. indeed, the officers OF Gen. Jackson'e
own Division OF the South.
Ambrister was convicted, LIST, of aiding
abettng and comforting tie enemy, supplying
them with the means OF war: and 2dly, IL
leading and commanding the Creek Indians ia
war against ths United States; no being =
British subject, end his country II peace with
ours. II is needless to discuss the evidences
sdduced in support Of the first charge, - the
accused cobfesse The second, WHICH 10 sar fn0
stronger Of the two. II ID unaccountable 10 me-
how the court martial. conyicting this man On
these charges, should in bis case, have comma.
ted the punishment OF death for that OF stripes
ard and should not have recalled
tie sentence OF death il pronounced against
Asbuthnot. IL il not clear, that, upon theln
own principles, Ambrister was the more henl.
Gus criminal
But il the guilt of these men. with every
imaginable aggrav-tion, be admisxd, the ques-
ton would still remlin whether. according To
the laws OF nations and The usagessof war, they
were liable to the punishment of death! II 10
impossible for the meanest capacity, 10 misun-
derstand the writers on public law, 50 far as To
see 10 them authority for the monsirous princi-
plies afirmedin the fatal gensral order. Dis
ca,ding the ,us,rous instances Of La Fayesie,
Kosciusko and De Kab, the question may be
hroush h, Immediately home 10 our bosnms, in
its application 10 the humblsst and obscursst of
mankind. American and British merchants ares
at this very time, supplying the royal and Ses
voiutlonary armies in Spanish America (which~
ever affords the bes, market) with all kinds Of
munitions Of war: II the masters and crews Of
their vessels should be taken in the very act Of
carrying on this trade, ara ,hsy liable 10 30
arraigned before naval or military court mas
tiai, sentenced, and hanged up at the yard
arm, or on the next treel Many of our yostln
have accepted commissions in the Patriot alm6
and are fighting the battles Of South American
independence; should they tall into the hands 81
Goa ar rollid =