Newspaper Page Text
FOR THE EVENING LEDGER.
No. 11.
Tt is a political axiom, which is difficult to
be refuted, that opposition and jealousy afford
an important security for the preservation o)
civil liberty. Ihe power and patronage,
which are necessary concomitants of the ad
ministration of government, while they pro
duce jiopular influence, will also produce its
counterpoise. In fee and enlightened nations,
the public expression of opinions, in opposi
tion to political measures, is a piivilcge gener
ally enjoyed, without any question as to the
right ; but those governments in which this
privilege is enjoyed may be, and olten are,
placed in such situations as will render its lice
exercise dangerous and imprudent, if not cri
minal. It sometimes happens, that a nation,
bv its relations and intercourse with foreign
powers becomes involved in contests, immedi
ately affecting its interests, Us rights and its
independence. Ihe contest in which the
United States are now involved with Great*
Britain appears to be of this description. The
writer, in a few remarks lately published, coi -
sidered this as a case in which, if the govern
ment and tire nation are faithful to themselves
and to each other, they must be in perfect
unison. Under this impression, he could not re
-1 iin from expressing Iris disapprobation of a
Ute editorial paragraph which appeared in the
Augusta Herald. In a reply, which discovers
much impatience of rebuke, the editor charg
es the author of these remarks with want of
candor, in selecting a part and omitting o,her
parts of his paragraph. If the smallest degree
of allinity in sentiment, or consistency in prin
ci|>le. ha'! been apparent between the sentences
quoted and those omitted, the writer would
have been justly chargeable with having adopted
an tmcaiidid mode ofdiscussion ; but the former
beingin direct hostility with the latter, it was
not possible to treat the whole paragraph as
the reasoning of the same man on the same sub
ject. The Writer does not, therefore, consider
himself charge rble by the editor in any other
respect than with want of charity , in not hav
ing adopted, as the editor’s real sentiments,
those contained in the same para ruph, w hich
breathed so much of the spirit of patriotism,
and in not having rejected the opposite opi- ,
tiions as mere words of sound, not intended to ;
make any impression.
The editor next charges the author of these ■
remarks with a perversion of fact, in stating, that
the allegation of ** four mutinous and deserted )
British seamen having been received on board
of the Chesapeake,” rests on “ a mere asset - - j
tion t f the man who committed the outrage.” j
The extract from the Norfolk Ledger,(whence
the Augusta editor professes to have derived;
the intelligence) mentions them asseamen be
longing to a British ship of war, who rose up
on their officers, &c. ivven il this extract does !
inrplv that they were real British seamen and
deserters, on what other basis could the Nor
folk editor have rested his statement than the
allegation of the British commodore. But the
Norlolk statement implies no such fact ; nor
could it admit of such const ructions especial
ly when it is recollected, that the newspapers
published at the scat of government, within
tlnee days after the date of the Norfolk Led
ger referred to, positively announced that they
•were native American citizens.
But the question between the two govern
ment is entirely a question of principle, The
degree of injustice, the extent of enormity
wuli which the late aggressors are chargeable,
can only be ascertained by the decision of an
abstract question, not subject to be controled
by any particular facts respecting the national
character of the persons who were taken from
the Chesapeake. Li has been uniformly insisted
by the government ol the United States, dur
ing the iate and present wars between Greal-
Bi ituinand France, that a belligerent has not,
bv the law of nations, any right to enter the
territory or ships of a neutral nation, for the
purpose of searching for and seizing any
persons whose allegiance or services thev
claim. That upon this inviolability of neutral
sovereignty anil jurisdiction depends, in the
present state of things, the existence of the
Unfed Slates as a nation, and on this alsode
pends those immunities which are guaranteed
bv the constitution to all within their limits.—
Upon this principle the government of the
United States has uniformly, (as was before
remarked) disavowed any obligation to banish
from its territory, or deliver up to a fo
reign power, any person over whom such con
trol may be claimed. One exception only to
this general rule exists, tinder the law of na
tions, which is undeniable—l mean that of an
open and public enemy in arms. The 27th ar
ticle of the treaty of 1794. while in force,
formed a partial exception. It was limited as
to the objects, and qualified as to the mode of
execution—lt was limited in its operation to
persons charged with murder or forgery, with
in the limits of the nation claiming them ; and
the surrender of such person could only take
place “ on such evidence of ?riinin<*lity as,
according to the laws of the place where the
fugitive or person charged shall be found,
would justify his apprehension and commit
ment for trial, if the offence had Iteen there
committed.”
It is therefore extraordinary that the learned
editor should have been so unacquainted with
the subject, as to have imagined that this arti
cle of the commercial treaty had any bearing
on the question in contest, or tnat the period of
its limi ution was the criterion by which to as
certain whether the. United States were still
bound to the performance of a duty in this /lur- .
tiiuiar case.
Rome of our political sceptics have attempt
ed to deduct from the enormity ol the late ag
gression, by supposing that those men had vo
luntarily enlisted and leceived the British boun
ty, and by pretending that this conduct has here
tofore been acquiesced in by our government,
and that it was improper to enlist four deser
ters, knowing them to be such, whether Ame
rican citizens or British subjects. Is such an
allegation capable of a decision—by whom, and
in what manner ? bhall a British court of ad
miralty, or any other tribunal ol a foreign na
tion, extend its jurisdiction to the United States,
for the purpose of deciding whethet an .Ame
rican citizen has voluntarily forfeited his light
to the protection of his government ?
However anxiously this proud nation may
aspire after universal maritime dominion, and
however hold her Lte sti ides have been towards
the attainment of that end, yet Iter govern
mentnever can claim a right,or complain of an
injury, on tht ground last stated. Ihe duty of
perpetual allegiance, which originally was a
mere incident to tenures of land, under the feu
dal system, has since become a principle of
their tivil polity. According to their doctrine,
a British subject cannot, by withdrawing and
becoming a citizen of another nation, divest
himself ol the obligation to allegiance and obe
dience which a subject owes t<> bis monarch,
much less can lie enlist himsell for the purpose
ol bearing arms in foielgn service. How then
can the British government claim the personal
service ot an American citizen, under the pre
tended sanction of a contract which that govern
ment would treat as fundamentally void ?
Tho’ the United Sta'es do not recognize the
absurd doctrine of perpetual allegiance, and tho’
they deny to no man the right of expatriation,
yet this right, to be effectual, must have been
consummated by an actual bona fide lcmoval
and establishing a domicil in another com try.
Our government dv.es not admit the. right of a
citizen, either native or naturalized, to with
draw himself for the mere purpose of engaging
in foreign service ; arid no contract of enlist
ment, under such circumstances can be any
more binding on the United Stales than it
would be on the government of Great-Britain.
If this view of the question is correct, the
aggression cannot he better justified by the
pretence ot seizing men who had voluntarily
enlisted in Iheir service, than by asserting a
right to retake, by violence, men who had been
originally impiessed into their service by vio
lence. Ibe writer lias been drawn into a more
copious discussion of this subject than he had
contemplated, by a uaiii of reflection to which
the Augusta editor's reply tended. It is a sub
ject winch lias long intcicsied the American
people. from the commencement of their
neutial relation to Great-Briiaiu, as a nation at
war, her navy has exercised a most ctuel and
lawless system of tytunny toward American
citizens on tne ocean. ft* , beets have now
produced an a wiui crisis. May Heaven avert I
the issue winch we at present appieheiulas be
ing almost inevitable.
A FEDERALIST.
TRIAL OF COLONEL BURR.
federal court.
Richmond, Wednesuuy, August 5, 1807.
Present, the Chief Justice of the United
States, and t irus Griffin, judge ol the uis
trict of Virginia.
1 ne witnesses on behalf ol the United States,
were again called ovei ; when it appeared that
commodore Thomas Truxion, general \\ il
liam Luton, William Duane, Pe.er Taylor,
Charles Willie, John Graham, Samuel Swart
wout, Julien Dupcistrc, Paul Henry, Mallet
Prevost, Israel Miner, George Morgan, Tho
mas Morgan, Nicholas Perkins, Robert Spence,
George Harris, Cyrus Jones, Simeon Poole,
Dudley Woodbritlgc, Edmund B. Dana, John
G. Henderson, Alexander Henderson, Hugh
Pheips, general James Wilkinson, Chandler
Linsiey, John Mulholland, James Knox, Wil
liam Love, David Fisk. Thomas Hartley, S.e
phen S. \\ elcli, James Kinney, Samuel Mux
ley, Ambrose D. Sinim George Peteis, Abner
L. Duncan, John A. Fort, James M-Dovvell,
Morgan Neville, Hugh Alien, Israel .Miller,
and Henry Philips were pi esc in. Serjeant Ja
cob Dunbaugh was understood to be in town,
but prevented by sickness from attending.
Mr. Hat then moved for a postponement of
the trial lor a few days more, on the ground
that witnesses deemed to be impo taut were
still absent. He said the utility of the delay
Hitherto, hail appeared from the ct: cumstaiice
that a number hail ai rived situ e the couit was
opened, and therefore, from a farther delay, the
arrival of others might be expected.
The Chief Justice observed that it was in
different to the court. |
Alter a shot t conversation between the conn-’
sel oil both sides, it was agreed that a list
should be furnished of the witnesses, and of
their places of abode, so far as they had heen
ascertained ; and that a postponement should
take place until Friday.
Mr. Hay pmpoed an arrangement, us to |
the movie of conducting the trial ; the object of
which was to save time. He said that the
course pursued in Great-Brilain on such occa
sions is, for the counsel for the prosecution to
open his case and examine all his witnesses,
before any thing is said on the other side ;
for the prisoner's counsel, afterwards, to state
the case on his part ; to proceed to examine
his witnesses, and to make such observations
upon the whole of the testimony as he should
think proper; and for the counsel for the pro
secution to terminate the argument bv a reply.
This, he said, was a convenient and expedithtis
method. But) in Virginia, the practice it ai
follows ; the attorney for the United States, or
for the commonwealth, states the case on the
pai l of the prosecution, and the counsel for the
accused also makes a statement on his pait :
after which the evidence is gone through on
both sides, beginning with the witnesses against
the prisoner. This being done, the counsel
for the prosecution commences the argument,
is answered by the counsel lor the prisoner;
and then concludes the debate. Mr. Hay ob
served that this mode was much more tedious
than that which pievatls in Gteat-Biitain ; and
therefore ought particularly to be avoided in
conducting the trial of Aaion Burr, in which
the number of attornies employed, and of wit
nesses to be examined, is so great; especially
as other trials equally tedious are about to take
place; Herman Blar.net hassett being now in
custody, and Jonathan Dayton known to he in
this neighborhood.
Mr. Wickham wished time to consider the
subject ; not being prepared to deter mine
whether the counsel for colonel Burr would ac
cede to the proposal; as this was anew mode
of proceeding, to which they were not accus
tomed, and they wished to consult their client,
who, on this day, was not in court.
Mr. llay said he did not think this a matter
of consent; but the court oughttofix the prac
tice.
The Chief Justicf, observed thrt it would
be better to bring on this question oij Friday ;
since gentlemen, in the mean time, might set
tle it among themselves ; saying, moreover, he
should feel a difficulty in departing from the
settled mode of practice in this country ;
though he thought the Engl sh mode better
than out’s. The best mode appeared to him
to be this ; that the case should be opened ful
ly by one of the gentlemen on the part of the
United States ; then opened fully by one of tne
dounsel on the other side ; that the evidence
should next be gone through ; and the whole
commented upon by another of the gentlemen
employed by the United States ; who should
he answered by the rest of the attornies for co
lonel Burr; and one only of the counsel for
the United States should conclude the argu
ment.
Mr. Hay, looking forward to other trials, re
gretted this decision, as it would occasion so
much labor and fatigue, in conducting so many
prosecutions, that he did not think himself ca
pable of undergoing it. He observed too that
the counsel for colonel Burr would have a de
cided advantage by this arrangement ; since
only one of those on the part of the United
States would have to reply to the speeches of
live or more gentlemen on the other side..
Tne Chief Justice said, that although the
gentleman who concluded should have to reply
to five or more speeches, yet those speeches,
would probably not contain more arguments
than would, if one only of the attornies should
speak, be condensed into one. The number ol
speeches would not increase the number of ar
guments. He said, however, that the course
he had mentioned was only recommended, not
determined by the court.
Air. Hay said it would be a very difficult and
laborious task for one gentleman to answer the
many objections which would be started by the
ingenuity of so many able counsel. He shi uld
wish therefore, at any rate, if the course re
commended bv the court should be adopted,
that two of the counsel for the United States
might he heard in reply.
Mr. Bo its observed, that probably an ar
rangement might be agreed upon by the next
tlav ; and proposed an adjournment until then.
After some unimportant conversation on the
subject, the court adjourned to sit again on F ri
d..y, twelve o’clock.
Friday, August 7.
The witnesses were again called over, and
several who had not been present before, ap
peared, and were recognized to attend until dis
mal ged by the court.
The connsei tor the United Slates, however,
not being as well prepared to go into the trial
as they expected to be on Monday, (many ot
their witnesses being still absent) the trial was
iurther postponed, and the court adjourned un
til Monday next, twelve o’clock.
In the course of this day, a difficulty was sug
gested by major Scott, the Marshal ol the Vii
giuia district, as arising out of the order of the
court, by virtue of which colonel Burr Had been
removed horn the penitentiary house to his
present lodgings. He stated that he had been
informed from good authority, that the secreta
ry of the treasury had declared he would not
allow itis charge of seven dollars per day, for
thegmtids employed for the sale keeping of the
pisoner; and iheiefore he might lose that sum,
ivhicli he had hitherto been advancing out o.
his own pocket.
The Chief Justice declared the firm con
viction ot the court that the order heretofore
made was legal and proper—that the payments
made in pursuance thereof would be sanction
ed by tne court, and ought to be allowed by
the secre ary of the treasury. He could not
believe that the secretary would finally disal
low those items in the marshal’s account. But
as the officer ot the court ought not to be sub
jected to any risk in obeying its directions ;
anti, if the secretary should refuse to allow him
credit lor the money paid, the court had no
power to compel him to do so ; and the si
tuation of the marshal was such that he dared
not to enter into a controversy with the secreta
ry ; the court was disposed to rescind the or
der, unless some arrangement could be made
by colonel Burr and lus counsel for the indem
nification ol the marshal.
Colonel Buhr declared that an offer had
already been made on his part to indemnify
the marshal; and.that he was still ready ant!
willing to give him satisfactory security, that
t!he money should be paid him, ir. case the cv
cretary of the Treasury should itiuse to allow
the credit.
After some desultory conversation, noihi g
positive was agi eed upon; but it appealed to
be understood, that security was to be given to
major Scott, and that colonel Burr was to -
mam in his apartment near the Swan! avern.
Herman Blannc;hacsctt is now in cmd'ce
ment in the Penitentiary of this city. lie .t -
rived here on Tuesday last, front Lexingt*
Kent, wheie he was apprehended, and conont: -
ed to this place by Mr. Meade, deputy mat ski,l
of the state, under a guard ; aid conveyed i .
mediately to the Penitentiary by the marshal of
Virginia.
It is mentioned in a Philadelphia paper, that
the celebrated William Lewis, of that place,
is to be added to the number of colonel Bun’s
counsel.
Extract of a letter to the Editor of the Aurora,
dated Niagara, July 23.
“ I am, in common with yourself, a friend to
the United States, and its government, and as
great an enemy of British turpitude, insolence
and injustice. Our neighbors of Upper Cana
da ait not thought as well of with you as they
ought to be—and as for the news-papers of
Upper Canada, infer nothing liom what you
see m them. There is one printed in Yoi k,
Upper Canada, which is remarkable for nothing
else than a servile adulation of the present ex
ecutive of that piovincc—in one of its late num
bers it had the following false and execralie
paragraph :
“ i be diabolical machinations of a desperate
cabal have split the United State, that late
ficurElnng and happy country, into such facti
ons, that an invading cm my would be
and partially resisted.”
“ Such sentiments are no doubt collected
from the language of some emissaries in our
towns' —but they maybe well assured, that how
ever divided the citizens (I speak of the fron
tier*) of the United States may be on local po
litics, to a man they will be united in repelling
and chastising foreign invasion or foreign inso
lence ; let them look to it, for they know rfot
how soon the hour may come. I bis frontier
has long been sensible, that in the British go
vernment it has no friend—and the spaiks of
indignation and resentment are prevented, from
bursting into a blaze, that vvouid destroy the
British power arid influence in the Canadian
provinces, solely by a firm reliance upon the
magnanimity and justice of the administiation
of the United States ; on whom, and on the
spirit of their Atlantic brethren, they rely frir
redress for the recent outrage committed on
board the Chesapeake.”
1 ‘m+tm
When vve read the federal papers, it cannot
be doubled whether we have a British faction
in the bowels of the body politic. The city .if
London does not furnish so many advocates of
British outrage on Americans as the town of
Boston. That is, there are not so many write, s
in that city to vindicate the British navv for
searching our vessels, as appear in the pupe.s
of this town. The suppiession of the commu
nication from Norfolk can now he accounted
for ; when it was first received, the tory fac
tion had not got their lesson ; but within a lie >v
days, all the federal papers are put in requisi
tion, to vindicate the British, and condemn the
American administration. The Essex junto
have had time to rally and issue their orders.
They have their cue; and the junto are now
acting under their orders to help their old
friends.
We are willing to set out fair in the present
controversy. We do suppose that the main
body of the federalists a - e good friends to their
country ; but they have been deceived by a few
men who are enlisted in the service of the Bri
tish nation. These leaders are suspected, and
will be watched....and, once for all vve declat e,
if war does take place, vve will designate them
to the public as clearly as the tories were for
merly. If vve go to war, let us not make
play of it.— Boston Chronicle.
The British at Halifax —If vve may rely upon
the advices from Halifax, they are preparing
furnaces for red hot shot at that place, the pu -
pose of which is to burn some of ou.r sea-port
towns. 1 hose who are preaching up security
and moderation, had better iook about them—
and hide their faces for shame*.— lurora.
Nothing so shortly displays the spirit ofo”r
country, as the large mass of volunteers who
have slept forward to her defence. It is believe and
■hat the number who have tendered their servic
es ;o the executive will in a few days exceed
the <;u a of 18,563 men who are to be drawn
from Virginia.— Enquirer. f
The governor of idassachusetts issued his
orders to major general Biickctt, of the second
division, to designate 900 men, near the harboui s
within the lines of the said division, to hold
themselves in readinesss to assist the civil au
thority in carrying into execution the presi
dent’s proclamation against the British navy.
Captain Townsend, of the Arthur, arrived
at Providence, corroborates the account of the
affray at Canton, and further informs, that dis
patches had been sent to the emperor of Chi
na, at Pekin, and his orders on the subject were
expected to be received in two days after the
Arthur left Canton. In the meanwhile, all bu
siness with the English was suspended. —New
York paper.
Admiral Berkeley, itis said, is fitting ou*the
frigate La Yilie de Milan, ai Halitax, with the
intention of proceeding in her to the Chesa
peake.