Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1841-05-25

nted Oy the citizens oil another, may be psoceeueu
against well the State, iihe latter approve The act
IS stated markedly by tina, jurst, without the
reason being rendered.
The following deemed sufficient to sustain
The rule
The law of nations is made not BY the strong States
alone but b. the weak and the strong and is founded
upon reason and the nature CT things.
How would the rule claimed BY the British Govern
ment operate upon weak State:
1t would drive weak State TO take the initiative IN
q against strong State, the weak State wouo
be obliged to suffer violations of its laws, (sno'e'
queniy sanctioned by strong State,) to go uhre-
dressed If on the other hand The rule be as LAID down
by Va,te the weak State would have the means OF fui
cton because individuals being liable, they would
either take offend aganst its laws, or offend
ing would be punished
The rule claimed by Great Britain might sub ect a
nation OF less power be harrassed perpetualy by
strong State while at the same ,ime If the individual
offending could be punished the larger power would
desist from any such oppression The latter, then,
would be driven from pursuing measures OF this kind
to the alternative of open war; and determining upon
this might be deemed unadvsabe, because an open war
would excite the notice and sympathy of other States,
and be the means OF procuring their aid
The rule of Vatte would not only protect the weak
State but for the last mentioned, prevent the
happening Of war.
1.-THE rule claimed by Great Britain were the law Of
nations, nations would be exposed 10 from its ope-
ration 1t would many cases be easy 10 excite the
sympa,hes of nation in favor OF offenders against the
laws of foreign people, and the nation be thus led to
approve their acts under the hope that it nigh, relieve
its subjects from punishment abroad and be saved from
any peril ITSELF trusting TO the use Of negotiation or TO
IN appeal the OF the offended State The APP
prevail being made, negotiation might fail, and thus war
ensue. The rule would, even If negotiation were sue
cessful, be liable to great abuse.
The ue Of Fattel would enable weak State to e1-
ercise its own powers within its own dominons per-
fectly-it would be sorercign there; the other rule
would enable fore nation TO overrun 1t, and INTRO
duce confusion to its rights. IL need not be stated
that the rule applicable 10 weak State is applicable
to all
In the case now to be argued, it s to be hoped that
the rule which is right will be laid down BY the Su-
prerne Court Great Britain, if she do not acquiesce
in just decision, will be put in the wrong, and
obliged by the Of other nations, by the consc
Guences Of the STEP desist from measures OF re-
dress. If it is in the power of thus State, according
10 the law of nations, 10 punish Mcleod, his punish
Inent is cause Of war; and 1t would be an outrage
the part of England to declare IT,
STRICT CONSTRUCTION.
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK.
Before Chief Justice Is'son' and justices C0''en ana
MAY little .HeLcod Case.--As this case had been
postponed from time to tue, until thus morning, the
attendance had diminished in proportion to the uncer-
tainty of the arguments being heard there was n
large attendance however at he opening OF the Court
Mcleod was brought in by half past nine O'Clock, III
the custody of the Sheriff Of Niagara county, who was
attended by three or four assistant Alarshas'
The British Consul also present, and was accom-
modated with seat by the side Of the Clerk Of the
Court.
Mr.. Joshua A. Spencer and Mr.. Bradley were the
counsel in attendance for the prisoner and The Alor-
ney- General, (Mr. Willis Iia) and Mr.. Woods, the
District Attorney for Niagara county, appeared tor the
people.
The Chief Justice having called on the case
Mr. Spencer rose and said, question existed be-
tween himself and the counsel behalf Of the people,
as to the right of opening The argument lie supposed
that this was SPECIAL motion, and that, as they (tie
prsoners counspD had moved IN the case therefore,
bev had the affirmative Of the case, and were entitled
TO open and to the why they claimed the
prisoners discharge True, the counsel for the people
had inerposed demurrer to the case AID the statement
they had made on oath.
Justice Bronson SAID there were no p'eadnSs IN TINS
case and there could be no demurrer.
The Attorney General said, # the demurrer was
oyer-ruled he should ask PERMISSION 10 withdraw IL,
and 10 put in contradictory Of the statements on
behalf of the prisoner. lie then cited precedenis and
decisions TO show that he should frs, open.
The Chef Justice asked II this was question who
should have the last word. lie said il was very much
matter OF form, and was hardly worth conendlng Tor
The Attorney. General SAID he conended for it,
matter Of convenience TO himself but the Court would
be the better able To determine the point, when the ale
cations had been opened.
Mr. Bradley accordingly proceeded 10 state the facts
set forth the the wit; namely the custody
of Mcleod, by virtue Of proceedings III the Court OF
Oyer and Terminer, on nm indictment OF murder-al-
co. the detainer Of Wells the owner of the steamboat
Caroline for the trespass, and to recover damages for
the destruction of ii,s property, &c, &c. The civil
suit, however, counsel stated, had been discontinued
since the return made He then read the allega-
tons of the defendant IN the following words
City and County Of Ne,o York, IS.
Alexander Mcleod, the defendant in this cause, be-
ing duly sworn doth depose and say, that he has read
the return of the Sheriff Of the County Of Niagara, to
the writ OF habeas corpus on winch tho dePonent mas
been brought into this honorable Court and in relation
TO that return and the facts therein contained this de
ponent says:
Tha. the in month of December, 1897, and dcponen'
belle YES about the middle of SAID month, body OF mer
in number, deponent believes, about two or three
hundred, proceeded from New York, and took torci
BILE and hostile possession Navy Island in Niagara
river and lying within the province Of Upper Cana
d. and there organized and defended themselves II
a warlike manner against the lawfully CONSTITUTED
authorities OF the SAID province, and against the do
minon of her Majesty, the Queen OF Great Britain
and made war by the discharge of cannon, and in othe
ways upon her Majesty subjects at Chippewa, in sale
province
Tha, the said occupants of Navy Island, as deponen
is informed and believes to be true, were, to cons
jerable extent, composed of citizens Of the l. s. and
were commanded by one Van Rensselaer,, one of such
citizens.
That, as deponent is informed, and believes to be
true the said invaders supported with provision
and arms and whatever else they had for the purpose
Of The said INVASION chiefly and deponent believes ex
clusivey from the U. S., and BY citizens or residents
thereof
That the object of this invasion of her Majesty
Territory, as the same then proclaimed, was t.
make revolution in the said province, to cause thu
same 10 be separated from the Government OF Grea
Britain and to erect il into and independent ma
ton by force.
That in order to repel the said invasion and TO pre-
vent the said ACKNOWLEDGMENT Of the British donnIons
an army of about $500 strong assembled at CHIP
pewa by the authority and under the direction OF The
Provincial GOVERNMENT soon after the said invasion
practicable.
That between this army and the occupants of Navy
Island, frequent and sometimes heavy cannonad'
was kept up.
That owing to the support which the invaders receiv
ed from citizens and residents of the u S. the effort
on the part of the Provincial authorities 10 dlslodg
them were for long time fruless, they having retain
ed the possession OF the island until about the 10th day
of January, 1888.