The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1853-01-25

say that no respectfully adjudeaed be foune
winch VIII sustain The position that these p
fa'es What is pirate pirate, according TO the den
nlhonS OF The writers on international law, is a robbe
upon ine hgh seas Such also Is the definition oil The
| Spanish law writers.
Piracy, says Chancellor Kent is robbery or iorcible
depreciation on the high without lawful authority
and done amino fmaad and in the spirit and intention OF
universal hostility The Supreme Court of the United
STATES has also defined the crime 10 be robbery upon the
his seas which Is The universal definition OF the writers
on International law IN modern Europe including those
OF SPAN The offence of the Lopez men was not upon
ihe nigh seas nor done amino rdnd and other piracy
Is known 10 the law oil nations. Neither il piracy
Congress.
Now, sir you know the principles OF International
law are ouhded upon usage, upon treaty and upon Gus
ION, anu require the usage OF more than nation TO
ingrait upon them single principle That is well.re
ceVed doctrine, which has been recognised by the Su
preme Court OF the United States in passing upon oil
he acts Of Congress which assumed 10 add TO the inter
national code The principle has been recognised
py me leading powers of Europe with reference 10 the
slave uade which cannot be held piracy apart IRON
treaties. Spain could not make these pirates by It's
own aeclara.on II they were not pirates under the laws
oil halioas they could not be punished pirates,
aware that there are some elementary writer's who have
said that in unlawful expeditions like This, where the
men are taken prisoners, they are to be treated
rates and robbers, not entitled 10 the laws of But
this is TO be taken with qualifications; Tor the PROPOSE
ton as applied 10 these prisoners is not supported by a
single English or American adjudication. When they
commit robbery, they should be punished robbers
when they commit piracy, they should be treated p
rates. and when they commit MURDER they should be
punished as murderers.
Such the language of Mr. Clayton under the ad-
minislraton OF General Taylor. He did not admit that
the Contoy prisoners were pirates On the contrary he
asserted in relation 10 all OF them, and especially the
Contoy prisoners, tina, they had committed the OIL
fence of piracy and could not be punished pirates
marking that murder and robbery We're grave offences,
but not piracy. When the State OF New York arrested
Mcleod for his expedition into that State, and the de-
struclion OF the Caroline, he was not tried for piracy
haH hpan nm IftaH he triaHf
murder, and regular trial in all the forms of law
II is true that Judge Cowan in passing upon the
cited those authorities which aege thai persons engaged in
these expeditions might be treated as robbers and pirates
These citations were not long slace published in of
the papers in this city but the learned New York Judge
did not rely on them as authority in point And when
examined it will be found that all they intend assert
is, that II the offender commits robbery he may be pun
ished as a Tobber and ii piracy pirate He is not
entitled to the benefit OF the laws OF war; position which
will readily be conceded. do rot say that the Spanish
officers bound TO admit these to quarter if they
had been taken in conflict, with in their hands hut
having given quarter having received them prison.
ers they entitled to the rights of American citizens.
The fifty men under Criltenden who taken and
shot had not arms in their handSwhen they cap
tured They were endeavoring TO make their escape
from the island in two boats, have been informed by
good authority The men were In one boat and the
in another which probably accounts Tor their surrender
AS American czens then, guilty. not of piracy, but Of
an Off against the neutrality laws of this country and
al most conspiracy against Span they entitled 10
trial concede that, as ioreigneTs they might COM
but think The affirmative OF The proposition the better
opinion Still, they American citizens, entitled TO
the benefit OF the treaty OF 1925 with Spain, which de-
clares
contracted offences committed by any citizen subject
of the party within the jurisdiction o the ohe the
same shall be made and prosecuted cpo orden aulodad
ds la usieao by order and uhory of law only, aud
cordg the regular course of proceedings usual in such
broad anu appIes ~ hs language nf he treaty Is very
CURED seizure detention for ofences committed" II
is clear these American citizens were sezed and detained
within the meaning OF the treaty How lhen were they TO
be prosecuted By authority OF law only and accofaing
the regular o proceedings usual IN such cases
Such language in statute IN England or his country
would be held guaranty to the accused trial according
'to the law of the land" which, since the days OF Lord
Coke, has been held to trial BY the course OF
the common law by presentment or Indictment, and
Jury ln Spain they have juries, but the language OF
the treaty evidently contemplates trial in the regular
course or proceedings according TO the civil laws oil
Spain. Their lawyers and books draw wide dlstinc-
un between the proceedings OF what they term the or
dnary and extraordinary tribunals Civil courts are held
ky them be ordinary tribunals military and ecclesas
tca courts are extraordinary tribunals and not The reg
uar OF proceeding under their law any more than
court-maria is regular course oil proceeding rms
is still more apparent by reference TO the Spanish side OF
the treaty, which Supreme Court held IN The case o
Clarke 10 be the true exponent oil The provision oil
another treaty with Spain, when II alluded 10 spanish
law aud proceedings, and even corrected construction
which the had previously given TO the English ar
| ticle in the treaty. . , ;,
The spanish side declares that American citizens shall
he arrested and prosecuted por orden auordad de la
iuscia" Jusca is ordinarily rendered lustlce but IN
this instance and generally when used with reference TO
judicial proceedings more properly translated Jiiod-
fue The word in Spanish is OF much more technical
meaning than iac, which is used the English eqava-
lent in The treaty The Spanish authors, when they use
the word with reference to the administration OF justice,
apply IL 10 the of proceedings IN the civil tribunals
And such is evidently lis sense in this treaty That such
was intention OF the treaty, is apparent from the des-
patch OF Ar. Pnkney, profound lawyer, who nego-
goliaed IT, and who said II was proper provision IN
treaties with all such countries Spain II is evident
that he supposed he had secured to his counymen IN
Spain regular trial in the civil courts in all cases The
object OF this provision OF the treaty 10 rescue The
citizens OF the United States from these extraordinary
and arbitrary tribunals; from these military and eccesi
the scandal of Chrisendom At all events, 1t was the
duty of the administration TO contend Tor reasonable
construction Of the treaty, which secured lar trial to
American citizens.
The construction put upon the treaty by the gentleman
from New York cannot be sustained. His construction
is that these citizens o the United States were tried and
punished in the Spanish subjects, and
therefore they and their friends had right 10 complain
Why, SIR IL was avoid that very thing that tire treaty
made II to avoid the necessity OF the citizens
OF the United States being subjected to these infamous
the treaty inserted; and The construction that s now
attempted to be put upon would destroy the whole iorc'
and virtue OF the guarantees OF the treaty.
/ Again the trial by a summary court-maruai was
violation of the treaty, because Spanish subjects coult
not. under the laws OF Spain, be tried for in hos
cases where the arrest made by military authority
they may be tried by the ordinary council OF war. which
is permanent tribunal, but not by summary court
martial. The trial was not therefore the regniar pro
T.. g. ...L. I.