Newspapers / North-Carolina Centinel and Fayetteville … / July 16, 1793, edition 1 / Page 1
Part of North-Carolina Centinel and Fayetteville Gazette (Fayetteville, N.C.) / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
A 70JVN AND COUNTRT PAPER; PrintsdTUESDA7\ ALEXANDER MARTIN, for JOHN SIBLEY. VOL. I.)—[non acti parte] TUBS DAT, JULY 1793. >[jUSTITIAM SPECULAMUR.] (NO- 49*) MISCELLANY. FOR THE FATETTE. GAZETTE, HERMIT. No. in. “ Where inujl old find indulgence^ tf it do not meet with it in the piety and par- tialify of children.” Pal t y. ‘aT hat virtue renders its pofltfr* V more ainiabic than filial ref- pec*! ? Wiiat duty can we difeharge, vdhcli vi-r'ds fo much real comfort and dcHglto ilicfe who are the objects of it: The truly benevolent will anfwer, there is none. A parent who has felt trouble and anxiety on account of a child, whofe care bad iheltcrcd it from the rude blafts of misfortune, and in- Aillcd into its mind virtuous principles ; has a claim upon its aire(!licns and fer- viccs, which none but the unfeeling or abandoned can refnfe / and he who is unmoved at the diilrelfes of a good pa rent, or flow to relieve them, has little virtue of any kind to confole him : Some fuch reflcflions \vere prefeitted to rnv XT ind by an event, which, aliho* fncle in itfelf, gave me a feeling of de licious melancholy; which no former ccciirreuc? of my life had produceef-r Keturnintr from a vifit to one of my reigliborr., I f)brerved u perfon fitting by the fuic of the rotivl, whofe appear ance {'truck me with reverence snd a- m r7-ement; .age had furowedhis checks CL'd robbed his forehead T all but a few wh'te'. Dckfi,which hangingloofely down, pcTire 1 to an honorable fear over his Icl" eyebrow, A tatter^'d ren*mcn?al cn^t and a pitclicd wallet, which V.ad ho ftores to boa it cf, called f Of rh all my fyirpaihy for a fellow fc Idler ; and the CAt’-emc c:! 'rr-'s and hunger, under the prefTiire of v'h'r’i his body .'cc-.ned to he fiinting, -T'T'Cw 1 u"*.!of rrfpc.'!. p-u. as if Providence had de- ferted the wrairefto^her children, his eres had fofl il;eir fight ; and his tre- imdous ’yoice, murimming the fad lan guage of diPtrefs, touched at or.CG the tcndeunl firings of my Lea’-t. The fin miat: oM i appearance had hither to riveried iT!y filent ama:'emerit, h’lt T cordd wait no longer ; hiy ettp of niife- ryfeerned to be fail, And I rejoiced at the idea of'.Mviug cPHifort to a fellov/ crentu'.o. who wanted it fo much.— “ f ir 900’'Ad ovan^ is your affi'AionA fdd I. “ /Hat! Sift have you fien n/v c'/ii—1 allighted from my herfe—“ /i prar \0H irHorvt r/e, have you 7:0 osie to condud v'.u to a ho;"pifable roofi or wipe Ac tear cf Tnjfery frem your chcekA^ “ Ho c eh* nnfwercd he, ralfing his fnow V’hite head. The tone in which he ut tered tliefe In'} words, feemeJ *to be a complaint againd the juflice and hu manity of the world. “ Alas ! Sir,” r.onlinntd. he, “ jKy four clAddren^ ally all have dejert d rne ; 7f:y povertyy r:y ape and T'ly hlin h'.ef} have driven them away—hut I feryive them—hut—wv daughter—my iauphferH repeated he v/ith afighwhich feemei to burPt fome of the finefl vefTels of his heart—“ fioe is f?’y childy my friendy Jhe nvh',m I leaQ regarded when the fun- Jhine of fortune he amed upon me ; and new when I am home down hy a niiphtof raife- ryy foe is the only one who will give me coosifort-*^ “ hVhen did fhe leaveyou ?” 7 eferdnyy fcr tf:e firf timed* Yo* have notfuveiy been UTihap>pT from your vouth—you could not have arrived at fo advanced an age, if forrowHiad been your conflant companion.” The poor pid man fighed, and gave me his hillory in a few words. (Fo Is continued.)’ L AIVI NTPLUG ENCE, INTERESTP'-'O TRTAl, OF THE SHIP VVJLLIAM, AND hfr cargo, ZIert.ionedh; a former paper to Is captur ed hy a French privateer, and Libelled ly her formery Brilifoy owners. THiLADcLPHiA, Frjoar^; the 9th | JUN? i(j\^jr inft. carrie on be- J’-’-d-;e Peters, the caufeof the hbe ants agar ft the (hip kVilllam, of Gla'gov,—And on Friday the ziL the libel p ca and jepiicatn ii being firfl re- cUj'i.oiatccl by the ‘-^dge, as v,cil asthe pleadings of the council, he preceded to deliver his Decree upon the plea io the ju- rifdifliony as follows— Diitiift Court of the United States, in and for Pennfylvania Diftrift, Robert Findley, jun. and others, fubjcdls of the King of Great-Britain, veiy/x/, the ihip William and her cargo, now in the port oi Philadelphia. I have given this fubjeil every con- fideraiion j am capable ofj and have de liberated us on the arguments and au thorities, brought forward by the ad vocates on both fides the queliion, with the attention they juftly merit. But it lecms ta me that much has been faid, not immediately applicable to the only- point I have now to dctermiile, to wit.* Whether this Court is vejled with the pow er to enqure into the legality of the prizes and io invejiigats the fafi on which all the reafonings are founded ? If this fadl is e- ftablifhcd, and the extent of our terri torial limits afeertained, fo as to make it deaf, that a capture has been made within the territories ofthe United States there is not a doubt but that a flagrant violation of the rights of neutrality has been committed, and this is followed by many ofthe confequences mentioned by the advocates for the libellants fo far as they refpeft our national dignity, and duty towards a friendly power en deavouring to caufe reftitution or ic- compence to be in-adc. Nor does this feem to be denied by the other fide of the qiieftion. But the cmbirraflVnent ftill exifts. Who is to enquire into the matter, and either give or attempt the red»^cfs ? It is difficult fora neutral nation, with the beft difpolition, fo to condu^l itfelf, as not to difpleafe one or the other of the belligerent parties heated with the rage of w§:r, and jealous of even com mon atJls of juftice or friendfiiip on its pait. Neither is it cafy for the nations at war to reftrain their fubjeifls from a5:s cf violence, even in the lemiories of their friends. The Icaft under con- tiol, are thole whofe objefls is not ho- mrable confiiA or patriotic exertioa. Thefe are aduated by a fpiritof lucre, wheih not only incites to plunder, the bafe and lawlefs frcebooters.but tarnlfii- es even h>'roifm, by feducing into un- juftifiable fe(f^ions the braveft men. It would be for the Interell of nations and the happinefs ct mankind, if by univer- fal confent, the quarrels of nitionswerc prevented from being turned to the pur- pofes of private advantage. But the iwords of thofe who fights for gains, will not in our days,’: be beaten in to plough fhcares. We muft take nations and men as we find them, and confideras lawful, what thofe at war authorize, fo far as it ref- pe^s the parties engaged. After all, it depends much on the ihterefts, the conveniences, or the good temperof go vernment, whether a neutral fliall, or lhall not beengaged in war. A pracent and juft conduct on the neutral, parti cularly, is the fureft preventative. . But how to evince this, is a matter of con- fideration with thofe to whom the go- vernmentis delegated. The fimpleft mode of evincing our impartial defpo- fition,is to confine ourfclves to the caf- tom ofother nations in our predicament. An over anxious xeal to avoid contefts may other wife lead us into error, and while we arc endeavouring to avoid one rock, we may fplit on another. Mutual toleration muft be exercifed, for thofe that are at war, and thofe who are not, have their ihare of difficul ties on this fubjeft. Under this view of the matter before me, I have given a patient hearing to both fides, and have particularly attend ed to the arguments by which a jurif- didion has been endeavoured to be e- ftabliftied in this court. I muft certain ly be allowed by the advocates for the llbellatits, that they have not been able- ro fhew any dired authority upon the point. For the two cafes of the Doke of Tufeany, feizing the veflkl commitv ting the outrage near the Port of Leg- non, and that of the King of England, ordering reftiullon of the effeds taken out of the houfes of the inhabitants, and bclongbg to a fhip of a friendly power, driven by its enemies on his ihore, appear to have been ads of power and not done in confequence of decrees, or orders ot courts of admiralty. Yet thefe jiirLdidions exifted in both the countries above-mentioned. The cafe of Capt. Landis, in the A- mcncan frigate Alliance, who was or dered by the court of France to reftore a (hip taken by him, is not in point— for the Foflers, who appeared as own ers, were either fubjeds, or perfoni rc- fident and domiciliated in France, and the (hip was failing under a paftport of that nation. They therefore could not be confidercd as enemies, and the cap ture not being made from enemies, the cafe was not comprehended in the trea ty, or the capture authorized by the laws of nations. In the cafe falling un der the notice of the King of England, (except that of his having the power of peace and war, as an appendage to which, he might have exercifed this kind of authority) I (hould not have fuppofed him veiled, vpjthout an aft of the legiflature, with the authority he nfed, and it is doubted by Binkerfhock, whether he did right in interferriag at all on the occafion. If it he confident with treaties, and otherwife right, our legiflature can veft the executive in future wirh firailar powers, I fhould fuppofc too, that the 1! be r ty offelfilh pri zes, inaneutral country is not perfeft by right, and may alfo be confidercd by our national legiflature, as a fubjeft of regulation. If any cap tures are made within our limits, and the VefTels or plunder is brought with in our ports, the fale may be forbidden; they m*ft then be either abandoned, or c.arried within the jurifdiftion cf the Captors ; where the proper courts will confidcrof their legality. Yet that is a matter not of judicial but of political arrangement and muft be left to thofe who hisve the authority to direct. Tht Gv-rcignty of onr nation is as corpplete as that of any other. Therefore whatever other fovereigns can do, we have in our power, Butbe- caufe, at this time, the authority fuppo- fed necelTar^ on this occafion, is not as it is alledged to be found in the execu tive branch ; I dc net fee that*'the ju diciary ought to exercife it, as a confe quence refulting from political conveni ence 'or the neerffity of the particular cafe. This I fear would be a novelty diftated by our zeal, and might give caufe of offence to one, while we are aiming at juftice to ourfelves, or gratifi cation to the other, I hefitate not to u(c any plain authority. I know this court to polTcfs, let the confequence be what it may, but this is a queftion too importaat in its effefts, to be. afted on the fureft ground. I agree here, as I do in many of their other pofitions, with the advocates for the libellants, when they fay that “courts of admiralty juris- diftioD are lefs liable to objeftion as thefe courts arc regulated by the laws and cuftoms of all nations, and not liable to political bias or entangled in political confidcrations.” This (hould induce the greater caution in their determina tions. I have not feenany proofs that “ the laws and cujioms ofall nations** war rant the interference of this court. If they do not, no authority can be deriv ed from our own laws, if they were not filent off the fubjeft. In theetifting ar rangement of our goverment, we did not calculate on our relative fituation, as to contefts between other nations, if for this rcafon no immediate remedy is at band, who can juftly cenfure the exe cutive when he has given decided evi- dcnce of his impartial and juft inclina- ‘ t'oA ? Who can with rcafon blame the judiciary ; if they will not affume a pow er not conceived to be vefted in them ? Notthe gov;rrnrnent ofthe country whofe fubjefts are the libellants, to whom I vrifh every degree of juftice may be done, Theprinciples eftablifhedin the decifions of their own courts, and the opinions of their moft celebrated, lawyers in the conteft. with the King ofPruffia, inthe cafe of theSilefia loau,inagraat degree reach the point,'as to judiciary authori tyIn a neutral nation. In Palache’s cafe, 1 am aware that it only faid the vcffel ** was taken at jea '* but if not, it raiherappcarsthatitwould be more proper fora pffplomatic thana judiciary examination. The general principle as to the capture is agreed ; and is fimilar to that eftablilhed in our treaty with France, which ought io have its proper weight. It was refolvcd, by the whole court of King’s Bench upon conference and deliberation, that the Spaniards whofe (hip had been taken by the enemy, and brought into England, a friend to both parties, had loft the property of the goods forever and had no remedy^ for them in England. And relied pripci- paily on the books, in 2. R. 3. ubi fupra being of fo great authority, for by that bookhe that will fare to have teftitutioii of goods robbed at fea/ ought by law to prove two things, i(t. that the fove- rein of the plaintiff was, at the time of I taking, ir. anaity with the king of En gland ; 2d, that he who look the goods was, at the time of taking in amity with the fovercign of him whofe goods were taken, then was it no depradation or robbery, but a lawful taking, as every enemy might take fromanother.” 4. ins. 154* It is true that by the laws and ciff- toms of nations, the capture if taken in neutral bounds, is not a lawful prize ; but I do not fee that this court can get at that ciicumftance, without hokding plea as to the lawfulnefs of the prize. It is the original queftion and notcollaterof all matter which determine jurifdiftion. The courts of common law in England will not take cognizance of any thing arifing out of the queftion prize er no brize, “ becaufe the original caufe muft all come into queftion again.” And yet the admirality had determined that the (hip was no prize. Tbis will be a proper fubjeft of en quiry oii the part ot our government, or in a court of the country ofthe captor. Ere^yuv^tlou has eftabliihsdthefccourts, and knowing that, if war, they are an- fwerable to a nation at peace or in ami ty, if violation of territory happen in captors, care is taken to examine into this circomftance. If on this account, the capture is illegal it is fo adjudged : and the party taking is liable to da mages. Whether fuch damages (hall exceed the amount of the fecurity given by commanders of private (hips of war, whether one nation Is anfwerable to a- nother for' injuries done by its fubjefts to others, contrary to or wiihoat its or ders, is a matter in which there are diffe rences of opinion amongft civilians, and which it is unecclTary for me now to in" vettigate. Itisdoubtlefscontraryto the inftrufti- ons of the French government, that a- ny of the (hips cotnmiflioned by them, aft in a hoftile manner, in a friendly and allied territory. It is to beexpefted by one power from another, that her courts and her adminiftration will do juflice to the rights of fovereignty and neutrality. It will be the more to be lamented if a friend and ally (hould difappoint this expeftation.—But (hould this be the c^e, it is not for me to fay what pro- ^ ceeding (houldbe had. I have fubjoin- ed to this decree from the ** Expofition of x\it Motives,** &c. from the Duke of Newcaftle, the Britifh minifter’s letter to Mr. Mirchell the minifter of Pruffia, and from tlie report and opinion of Sir George Lee, Doftor Paul, Sir Dudley Rider and Mr. Murray, the late Lord Mansfield, on the fubjefts, I have men tioned, which are to be found in Ma- gen’s 463, 482, 437, 391, 496, 505. Other authorities from Britifh and other writers might be added, by which it appears, that when two powers have any difference between them, the affair muft be treated by negotiation, and not through the inftramentality of their courts of juftice. That affairs of prizes are only cogni zable in the courts of the power making the capture ; thefe courts being gener ally ftyled courts of admirality ; and that it never was attempted, before th* fubjeft of thatcontroverfy happened, to ereft in a neutral ftate, coutts for the' trial of prizes taken by belligerent pow- * exs, even where neutrals were
North-Carolina Centinel and Fayetteville Gazette (Fayetteville, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
July 16, 1793, edition 1
1
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75