Daily union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1865-1866, 1866-01-05

4uS sfOuft4b btattA " tic otcfttdIy Vi
the Navy for the arrest of Capt. Semmes, of
the late Confederate Navy, are, that after he
surrendered his Inflated ship, the Alabama,
he failed to place himself in the custody of
the victor in that engagement, but made his
way back to this country, and engaged in
armed resistance TO the United States Gov
ernment without having been duly ex-
changed. This opens up very delicate
question In the rules Of naval warfare, for
which We at this moment, remember no pre-
cedent in point. If Capt. Semmes was at
any time prisoner to his adversary, he was
only so by construction. The hosting Of a
white flag on the Alabama, was, beyond
doubt, surrender, and his Antagonist was
bound by every principle of humanity TO
cease the struggle. Howfar, by exhibiting
the white flag, did Capt. S. agree or bind
himself to go from. the place he was at, at
the time, to where Capt. Winslow might be at
any future time, and deliver himself into the
personal custody of the latter as prisoner
of war? The facts, in this particular case,
are, that. Capt. S. continued his resistance
until his ship was in positively sinking
condition, and the white flag was raised af-
ter the vessel had commenced to settle in the
waters, in which she was few minutes az
forwards forever buried She had actually
passed from view before Capt Winslow was
able to reach the spot where she went down.
Capt. S. nor any of his crew could have re-
NAMED on board and survived, but we're
compelled under the circumstances to aban-
don the ship and make the best exertions
possible to save themselves from drowning
Fortunately Capt. S. and some others were
able to get to a friendly vessel, which had
been merely a spectator of the engagement
and was taken into it from the water.
Now, under the view which would justify
his arrest, the moment he felt it impossible
to remain with his vessel and save his life
his duty required that he should have swan
directly to his enemy's ship, and thus COM
pleted his surrender; or, availing himself of
other escape from drowning, should have
availed himself of the earliest opportunity
to place his person in the hands of his adj
versary We believe neither of these re-
quirements to be tenable In war, the party
having the power to make a capture, is pre-
sumed to have the present immediate power
to take possession of the captive, and hold
him as such for any period which may suit
the interests or convenience of the captor.
The captive has perfect right at any time,
after capture, to make his escape if circum-
stances favor, or the want of diligence on
the part of his captors, viii allow. And this
is true after the capture is made complete,
this be true in the case described, then, it
would apply with still greater force in
case where the capture had not been COM
pleted, and where the pursued had opportu
mites of escape 1t is held to be the duty of
the soldier, in all countries, to fight his adj
versary as long as there remains reasonable
hope of overcoming him, or of repelling his
assault; then to yield the issue by taking up
some other position. If he is placed, by the
superior force or skill, or facilities of
movement of his antagonist, in such an atti-
tude as that he cannot retreat or escape, he
must then surrender. But when he can
either retreat or escape the expectation of
his country and of mankind is, that he will
embrace whichever Will be most beneficial
A.. L -. IL sef,,,
gency. We hold, therefore, that Captain
Semmes, in his escape from the sinking
Alabama violated no rule of right or of war;
that, on the contrary, if he had been picked
up out of the water by the Kearsage, an
could, without violating any express agree
ment or parole, have at any time escaped
captivity, he not only had the right, but
was bound in duty to himself and cause, to
have done SO.
Capt. Semmes, in his protest against ar
rest, does not embrace this view of the case,
but rests upon the ground that he was par
oiled as a prisoner of war by Gen. Sherman
upon The surrender of Gen. Johnston. This
we regard as amply sufficient, as it carries
with it guarantee of protection from arrest
so long as he subsequently violates no law of
the land. But, relying solely upon this, is
an implied confession of the charge, which
was not intended by Capt. s.; and which af-
fects the honorable character of the warfare
waged by him which we think he should
have repealed.
This is historical question, the adjudi-
cation of which will fix an important rule
in the prosecution of hostilities, affecting
other nations as well as our own. We are
pleased to see that the Commission which
will try it will be presided over by one of
our Oldest and most distinguished naval Off
GERS, who should have no interest in the
matter beyond establishing precedent that
will command the respect and adherence of
all nations. In all these investigations arts
ing upon the events of the late rebellion,
the object of the Government should be,
and we trust is, to establish principles and
rules for future action, rather than desire
for the vindictive persecution of particular
individuals