New-York daily tribune., 1861-11-01
PATRIOTIC PIRACY.

sovereignty OF tue " Coh'ouct"to p'e'O'' "
that can be said in that behalf is, that the
Davis Republic was fully recognized, after the
most approved style, by several lawyers in our
Circuit Court ON Monday last We have
beard that, in behalf of his client, an advocate
must be prepared to do anything and to say
anything and to stick at nothing; but for the
honor of the Fathers of this Republic, and for
the respect which is due to great history
we wish that these gentlemen OF the long robe
could have found it convenient to have adopted
some other rhetorical line; and to have been
little more sparing of their comparisons, al
ways meant to be complimentary to the lat
ter, between the patriots of '76 and the pirates
of 81.
The main fact relied upon by these ingen-
ous gentlemen, and dexterously presented by
them in many different fashions of brilliancy,
was, that the Government OF Great Britain
did not hang, during tho Revolutionary War,
our captive privateersmen. This is very true.
They did not hang them for the most excellent
reason, that they did not dare to hang tbem.
Bat if we had failed il tho very beginning
if the quarrel had been speedily decided, aud
British SID emacy had been In few months
restored upon this continent, and 1t Great Brit'
ain had then found herself with few Ameri-
, can sailor prisoners, she would have hung them
with the utmost satisfaction and CELEBRITY;
and certainly, by the whole law OF En-
Gland she would have had right to do 1t.
Here is a parcel of marauders, some OF them
letill owing allegiance to European powers,
who are found at sea- under an unknown rag,
preying upon our commerce.; aud when we
D catch them. and bring them into Court, they
plead through their lawyers that they were
robbinC by virtue of commissions from the
" Confederate States Of America" Ingenious
tars! What are the Confederate States OF
r America 7" AK the British Minister aud be
will tell You that be knows 10 such power
d AK the French Embltsador, aud be VIII re-
s turn YOU a like answer And, if it were
: othergse. we cannot see how. the act OF
s foreign Government can be pleaded in
e bar-these were substantially all pleas 10
D bar TO the Indictment, and not in any
: way questions for the jury-to Court owing
G ifs very highest allegiance to the United States
L of America, and sworn 10 support the Consti-
:. tuition of that Power.
d The arguments Of the learned counsel said
o substantially to the learned Justices: There Is
Z no such crime as Perjury. Your Honors, 1t
you see fit, may violate your oaths Of Office
: Tomorrow. 1t is all the baseless fabric of
r yision-it is q sham, a humbug and dclWion
Al II. - ot. tha rpgt
c the siest pretension. and the weakest usur-
patton, this Government under which We are
now holding a Court. We are satisfied that
nowhere in tie world, save in America, would
: such line of argument have been for mo-
: ment permitted. What British rebel was ever
Q allowed TO plead The illegality of the Hano.
yerian succession What lrish rebel was ever
allowed to plead the uhconstitutionalty OF the
Union But these lawyers, with true law
yers license, went further. They went to the
. jurisdiction. They did 10 their orations what
they could not do upon the record. They
stripped the gowns from the backs OF the
Judges, aud flung their wigs in their faces.
Because, by the Constitution, Judge Nelson 10
as much, for certain purposes> Judge IN
Virginia as in NcH-York-and if this be not 80
be is supply Mr. Nelson, with no more power
T to hold court here than there, and, in fact,
with no power TO hold court anywhere.
And yet the men who sought to save their
clients by these lsw.arguments addressed to
: jury and that, too in the face and eyes OF the
decsions Of the bench, were sworn officers OF
the very court which they thus insuted! Who
shall say that there 10 any limit to q lawyers
lceusei
$ Again: We know very well what is the
rule Of law in such matters; but who ever
heard prisoner indicted for manslaughter
: plead thnt he was guilty of murder, or 4 man
indicted for fornication plead that he only COM
mitted a rapel This, morally, is what these
lawyers did for their seaIhleyes. They did
not steal the horse-they only fred the stable;
they did not pick travellers pocket, but only
knocked him on the head. Well: suppose the
! prisoners had been indicted for treason. Why,
We should st.ll have had the same faded fnery
as we'll n one case as in the other. 1t would
have answered as well # the prisoners had
beon indicted for stealing Treasury Notes, or
robbng tho Mail, or for taking false oath ut
Government securities in bis pocket, or the
pllfered letters in his trunk, or tho menda-
ciously invoiced goods in bis warehouse. would
only have need to Issue his manifesto dsayow.