Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1841-06-22

Cabinet.
shall now offer few remarks On the question OF
pubc law involved in this case, and then Close nat
have 10 saw sincerely believe The administration oil
Mr. Van Buren, perfectly correct on this doctrine,
us LAID down by Slr. Forsyth Ii had found any au.
thorily 10 induce me 10 entertain DOUBT on t"a'
point | would refer 10 il most freely. now uhuei'
take to saw that the only circumstance which Has pro-
duced Confusion and doubt IN the minds OF wen ~
formed men THIS subject is. that they DO mol 'ahe
the proper distinction between state o. naonai ""'
and national peace. Ii nation he at war, Tue e""'
msnd OF the sovereign power 10 invade the tei,.is y
,s enemy and d. battle there against any hose "ee
almay juslifies The troops thus engaged.
When any Of the invaders are seIzed, they are coz"
sidcrcd as prisoners Of war, and as having ooie no
thing but what the laws Of war Justified mem III w.
nr I'm such they can never De heu ~ a"s NV,
crim;nallv in the courts OF The invaded county "a'
i clear The invasion OF an enemy territory Is one
Of the rnhts of war, and, III all IT'S necessary c'se
oueuces is justified By the laws Of war But mere are
offences committed c-cn in open war "i'ich 'nv
,ress command Of the offenders sovereign VIII not
Shield from exemplary punishment. Will give gen.
temen an example spy will be hung II cauS"'
even though he acted under the express con'hahu o
his sovereign We might cite the case OF The unior'"
nate Major Andre. lie was arrested on ms return
from an interview with Arnold and, his life being IN
DANCER the British commander (Sr Henry Clinton,
beleyr) made effort 10 save hun, by taking upon
himsefthe responsibility of this act But although he
| had crossed lines, whilst the two nations were
IN state of open and fragrant war, IN obedience 70 m
structjons from his commandment Chief, yet wash
;pglop. Notwithstanding rghtiully hung him rs spy
/ Now let me tell whoever shall answer me, Qi, IN
deed any gentleman Will condesccnd to notice what
have said-inr il seems we on thus SIDE OF the i"use
are to do ell the speaking, and they all the vons thal
all the authorities concur IN declaring hat Inc ID" Oh
nations protects individuals while obeying the orders
of their sovereign during stale Of open and ilagrant
war; whether il has been soemny declared or not, and
whether it be general or partial. These authorities go
no further But TO decide correctly on the application
Of this principle in the case before NJ we must r'co-
lect that the two belgerents here were England on
the hand and her lnsurgen subjects on the otnef'
and that The u. S. 4 neutral Power, III perfect
peace with England. But what is the rule in regard
to nations peace with each other This IS the ques-
ton AS between such nations, does the command Of
an inferior officer of the one, to individuals tn violate
the sovereignty of the other, and commit murder and
arson If afterwards recognised by the supreme auto
rty prevent the nation whose laws have been outraged
from Furnishing the offenders, Under such circim-
stances what is the law of naons' The doctrine IS
laid down in Eattel, author admitted to be OF the
highest authority on questions of international law
md the very question: todcm rerbiS, which arises in
this case in his book stated and decided lie admits
that the lawful commands OF legitimate Government
whether lis troops other citizens, protects them
iron. individual responsibility for hostile acts done in
obedience 10 such commands, whilst in state Of open
war In such case, prisoner Of war is never 10 be
subjected to the criminal jurisdiction Of the country
within which he has been arrested. Blu. what is the
Law Of nations in regard u criminal offences commit
ted by the citizens subjects Of Power within tie
sovereignty and jurisdiction of another, they being al
peace with each other, even If these criminal acts
should be recognised and justified by the offender
sovereign THIS IS the of the capture and dcsruc
tion of the Caroline. The subject is treated OF BY
ya,,el, under the head ''of the concern nation may
have in the actions Of her citizens book II, chap D.
parc lGl. ! shall read sections q, Il, and 10
"Ilnwevrr it is impossible, says the author, "or
the best regulated State, or for the most vgint and
absolute Sovereign, 10 model, al his pleasure, all the
actions Of his subjects, and IL conine them, On every
OCCASION lie most exact obedience, il would be
Just 10 inpue 10 the nation or the Sovereign every
faul, committed by the citizens We ought not, them
10 say general that We have received an injury from
nann, because We have received II from one ol liz
members.
"i}ul, If nation or lis chief approves and rafes the
net Of the individual il then becomes public concern
am The injured party is then 10 consider the nation as
the real author OF The injary Of which the citizen was
peIh7ps only the instrument
an HE oGsndfd Sa,r has IN her poHcr tic iadiridn1
mho has donc The injury, she may, mitiom sernpfe
hrng linn justice nud punish him. II he has escaped
and returned 10 his country, she ought to apply
10 his Sovereign 10 have justice done in The case
Can any thing in the world be clearer; The author
puts the case distinctly The nation injured ought not
10 impute the Sovereign Of friendly nation the
acts oft individual citizens: but if such friendly Sove-
reign shall recognise the acts As his own, II then he
comes a national concern. But docs such a recoGnI-
ton wash away the guilt of the offender and release
him from the punishment due hs offence under the
Jurisdiction Of The country whose laws he has violated:
| LIT Vallel answer Tins question. He says ~ the
o9ended STATE has in her po"er tho 'nd'r,dna 'rho has
aone tic injury She may, rHhom scr0Pe, brng mn 10
Justice aad punish him. There IS the direct, PLAIN,
and palpabr authority. And here permit me to add,
that think prove that, according TO sound rea-
son. the principle is correct; and that The question
would now be SO decided by our courts, even it the
law ri nations had been silent on the subject 1hIS
not only is, but ought TO be, the principle Of public
law.
Mr. Webster, in his letter to Mr. Fox Of the 2ilh of
April tells the British Minister that the line Of frontier
which separates the IT, S from Her Britannia MaJes-
tvs North American Provinces "is long enough to d.
| vide the whole Europe into halves.
/ This is true enough Now, Ivy admitting The doc
ne of Vatlcl be incorrect and unlounded, on what
1 consequences forced; beg Senators TO con-
slider this question. The line which separates US from
the British possessions line long enough 10 DIVIDE
| Europe into halves. Heaven knows have no desire
TO see a rebellion in Canada the Canadian pro-
vinccs annexed 10 the United States but no event
in fnturity is more certain than that those provinces
are destined be ultimately separated from the Br
sh Empire. Let cif come, and let every bic
Nab who shall then have any command III the Brush
possessions along this long line be permitted 10 send
military expedition into the territory OF the United
States whenever he shall believe or pretend That
will aid in defending the royal authority against those
who are resisting II, ana war between Hteat pii."i
and the L. S. becomes inevitable. British subject
maraudng under the orders Of his superior officer on
this side Of the line seized in the very act Well,
what ID to be done: suppose we are 10 wait unt'i we
whether his Government chooses 10 re-
cognlse his hostile criminal act. before We can m
Aict upon him the punishment which he deserves tor
violating our laws ii does, the jail door - inniedi-
atey 10 be thrown open; the offender, Il may DC the
murderer takes his fight to Canada and we must set
tie the question with The British Government. Such
Al tI,o n-.t,. rrtnant
and orr own Secretary of State. This principle would,
say, lead us inevitably into war with that Power
What can be dom, in state Of war In that case, the
laws of war provide that persons invading our territory
who are captured shall be considered and treated prl
soncrs of war. But while the two countries continue
at peace a man taken in the fragrant act Of INVASION
and violence cannot be made 4 prisoner OF war
Mcleod, however, is not to be treated this principle,
and punished under our laws if he be guilty, lest we
should offend The majesty of England The laws OF n
York 10 be nuled, and the murderer IS to run al
large.
But if the principle laid down by vaitel be sound