Cincinnati daily press. [volume] (Cincinnati [Ohio]) 1860-1862, 1861-05-22

greatly stimulate us at the North TO develop
and protect the Union party st the South
Important Legal DecIsion In Boston
Judse sprn sues Charge on tho Laws
Abninst Phaey, ...... .ttf,g..'-
At the opening Of the United States Dir
cult Court in Boston, on Friday, Judge
Sprague delivered q charge TO- the Grand
Jury, in which he defined the state Of our
laws with reference to the crime of piracy.
After citing provisions from the laws of
1890, 1920, 1925, Is46 and ls47. as TO what
constitutes the general crime, with the differ
entc degrees of penalty, the Judge remarks
that these enactmeuts were founded upon
the clause in the Constitution which gives
Congress the power to define and punish
piracy. But the constitutional power to
regulate commerce also affords basis for
additional penal enaetments,, covering all
possible aggressions and depredations upon
our commerce. The Judge then lays down
the following important principles, the bear
ing of which will be sufficiently evident in
the present crisis; 81 rs1 20 .f.f1s
These statutes being enacted pursuant to
.
and can not be invalidated or impaired BY
the action Of any State or States, and every
law, ordinance and constitution made by
them for that purpose, whatever its name or.
form, is wholly nugatory aud can afford no
legal protection to those who may act under
IL But suppose that a number Of States IN.
dertake by revolution to throw off the Gov.
eminent of the United States and erect them
relves into an independent nation, and as.
EUmn in that character In iacfo
authorizing the capture of vessels Of the
United States, will such commissions afford
protection tothose acting under them against
the penal laws of the United States7 Gases
have heretofore arisen where portion of a
foreign empire-a colony-has undertaken
to throw off the dominion of the mother
country, and assumed the attitude and
claimed the rights of an dependent nation,
and in such cases 1t has been held that the
relation which the United States should hold
to those who thus attempt and claim to in
stitute new government is a political
rather than legal question; that, IL those
departments of our Government which have
the right to give the law, and which regulate
our foreign intercourse and determine the
relation in which we shall stand to other ma
tioDs, recognizesuch new and self-constituted
government as having the rights of abellig-
| eIent in war between them and their for
mer rulers, and the United States bold a
neutral position in such war, then the ju
dietary, following the other departments
will TO tne same .extent recognize theneW
nation.
But if the legislative and executive depart
ments Of the government utterly refuse TO
recognize such new government, or TO &C
knowledge it as having any beiligerent or
national rights, aud instead of taking q
neutral attitude, endeavor by force to sup
0pnrp1afinnd hu r.oh
assumed government, as violating the rights
and infringing the laws of the United States
then the judiciary will hold that such depre-
dations are not to be considered as belli1sr-
ent and entitled to the immunities of lawful
war, but as robbery or other lawless depreda-
tions, subject to the penalties denounced by
our law against such offenses. The judiciary
certainly can not adopt more indulgent
rule toward those who are in open rebellion
against the authority of the United States,
or toward aliens cooperating with aud
acting, under the assumed authority of such
rebels. While the other departments Of The
| government and the nation refuse to regard
any State or association of States as having
the rights of bellgerent, or as carrying
on legitimate war, and are exerting not
only moral but physical force against them
as rebels and lawless sggressors upon the
United States and its citizens, the Courts
also must so regard them, and can not admit
that any legislation or assumption of power
by such State or States can authorize acts
in violation of the laws of the United States
or change the character of offenses under
them. ... ....-
There is another view. Mere rebellion
absolVes no man from his allegiance. Citi-
zeus of the United States, therefore, may
not only be subject to the penalties of trea.
son, but if they commit hostilities upon the
commerce of the United States, under COM
mission from any foreign nation, even the
Oldest and best established, such. as En-
gland or France, for example, they may be
dealt with as pirates, by the express enact
ments in the ninth section of the statute of
1870, which has already been referred to.
And aliens, who are subjects or citizens of
any foreign State with whom we have a
treaty, such as is described in the statute of
lS47, chapter 81, which has already been
quoted: "If, in violation of such treaty, they
make war upon the United States or cruise
against our vessels or property, under com
mission from any foreign n Government,
however long Acknowledged, may, by the
clear provisions of that statute, be dealt with
as pi 'ates. l',-..'.. .-. ~. ,as .-s.. {
ii aliens, subjects Of nation with whom
we have no such treaty, commit acts of hos
tility upon our commerce, under alleged
authority or commission of a new and self
created Government claiming to be indie
pendent it may be material TO inquire
whether such Government is to be regarded
as having the immnnities of belligerent or
whether such aliens may be treated as
robbers on the seas, and this inquiry
win be governed by the principles which
have already stated, 4, f'.-, i.-...,