Norwalk Gazette, Tuesday, June 14, 1825 · page 1

 

 

‘ 1.

 

 

 

not. I 32.

M}

NORWALK, com-. TUESDAY, JUNE ii,

I895.

 

*‘I___ ‘‘ T’

FROM THE NATIONAL INTELLIGENCSR.

COM .Vl0DOR'E - PORTER.

. _‘ ‘A pamphlet has been just issued from the

"press of Davis St. Forcc, ofthis city, entitled
“An Expositiori of the Facts and Circirtii-
‘stances whichjustified the'Expedition to Fox-
ardo; and the coriseqtieiices thereof; together

“ ~"with the Proceedings of the Court ofliiquiry

thereon, held by order ofthe Honorable the
Secretary of the Navy :——By D. Porter.”

The pamphlet bearsthe following dedica-

’tion:'—— , ~
_ 'I‘o John Quincy fldaiizs, President of the
Ilnitecl States: '

This humble elfort._to’ vindicate my conduct
itnd character is most respectfully dedicated
"by his very obedient and humble servant,

' . . D. PORTER.

‘lwashiugton, May I1, 1825.

__ And the following note, explanatory oftlie_
"publisher'sreasons for oiakingthe publication,
is prefixed to it:
. T./1c‘li:cr-l-i'scrnenf.—Tlie reader will bear in
i'_i‘_titi<i_ that when I was recalled from my coni-
mand to account for the affair at Foxardo, I
pledged inyselfto justify it. By the conduct
ofthe Court, to which the subject was refer-
red for investigation, I was driven from its
presence, and prevented froui making the ex-
planations on which I founded my justifica-
tion. Therefore, to redeem tiry pledge, Isob-
mit the following sheets. D. P.

.- We have perused this pamphlet with the
Interest which every citizen must feel in the
fame and fortunes of an officer whose name
is so intimately associated with the national
glory. It_compriscs the Proceedings of the
Court, the testimony of numerous witnesses,
a great number of Docutnents introduced by
the parties to elucidate the transactions in
question, the Defence of Comm. Porter, %I.c.

Not having rooiri at present for the entire
contents of the pamphlet, which exceed 100
pages, we have selected, for immediate pub-
licatioir, the Defence ofthe Coiiiiriodore,pre-
suming that the public are anxious to learn
on what grounds he rests the justificatiou of
an act which was deemed by his Government
so important and questionable as [0 induce his
recall froui his command to give an explaiia-
tion of it.

Tire opinion of the Cotirt of Inquiry not
having yet been made public, is consequently
unknown to us, and we are of course ignorant
of the impression which the defence of the
Respondent made on the -respectable body to
which it was addressed. We shall, therefore,
accompany its publication with no opinion of
our own, and no remark, save the expression
ofa firm belief, that whetherhc be adjudged"
to have acted right or wrong,he acted accord-
ing to his views of honor and duty. We will
add the hope that his defence may have the
effect tojti.-tify him before his governirient $3
his country, and to restore him honorably to
the career of usefulness.

Dtjimcc of Commodore Porter before the JV'a-
cal Court of Iriquiry, lately held at the .N'a-
vy Yard in the oily of Waslrington.

A Having been displaced from my command.
by ‘order ofthe Secretary nftlie Navy, to fiir-
nish such explanations as may he required of
every thing connected with the cause, origin,
pi-rrgry-ss, and termination, of my “transac-
ti'ni.s" at Fax’-irdo: I must refer to the letters
of Lietrt. Plait. Mr. S. Cabot, and Mr. Berg-
eest, for the origin; to my letter to the Gov-
ernorof Foxardo, and my official report to
the Secretary of the Navy, for the progress
and termination; and to the followiugexplan-
ation for the cause.

Irest riiyjustification on the Laws of Na-
tions and of Nature, highly approved prece-
llL‘I‘llS,al‘ltl the orders of the sec’ry ofthe Navy.

Ishall show, in the order I have placed
them, how far Ianr justified on each ofthose
grounds. and trust that I shall not only fully
acquit myself of any charge of wickedness,
wantonness. rashness, or indiscretion, but
prove that I should have failed_in my duty to
my country, had I not punished, by intimida-
tion or otherwise, the people and government
of Foxardo-

It is not. nor cati it be, denied, that pirates.

are considered b_v the Laws of Nations the
eiremies of the human race; and this being
the case, it is the duty of all Nations to put
them down. In the case ofpirates, tlien,there
are no neutrals; it being the duty of all No-
tions to put them down, all Nations are allies
against them. In the case of belligcrents,
where the army of one party enters the terri-
tory of a neutral power, the army ofilie other
has a right to follow it there; and the right is
strengthened if‘the pursniiig army follow its
enemy into the territory ofau ally. '1'Iir's is
the doctrine coritainut in my instruct-ions.

Spain, and the depcntlcticies of Spain, are
as much bound as any others in the alliance
for the suppression of piracy, anti if she fails
in her obligation, she is responsible for the
miiission, and must necessarily stiffer the in-
conveniences resulting from the endeavors of
others to ptit down the system, among which
nrethe destruction of fishermen’s houses and
boats on the coasts of the islands frequented
by pirates, the seizure of suspicious vessels
and persons, and the alarm and damage done
in fresh pursuit.

Of these she has no right to complain, if
she makes no effort of her own to pm down
piracy, and heretofore never has complained,
even when considerable efforts of her own
have been made. If, then, as the ally ofSpain
we have a right to latid on her shores; and
having a right to land there, have a right also
to all her “ countenance and support,” what
follows if the right is denied to us? It‘, so far
from giving us countenance and support, pi-
racy is aided and abetted, an asyltim is offered

, to pirates, and those who land in pursuit are

seized and imprisoned, does not the nation,
city, town, or people, who thus make coniiiron
cause with pirates, lose all respect for their
own character? forfeit all the respect of oth-
ers? abandon the advantage of the common

-- alliance? and becoiue, not only the allies of

pirates, but otrr open and active enemies, and
justify its in treating them as such? ‘As ene-
mies, then, we have the certain and undoubt-
ed right to land, pursue, chastise, and intimi-

date them; and the principle is the same,
whether they are the inhabitants ofa fishing
but, ofa town, a city, a province, or a nation.
The magnitude ofthe object makes no change
in the principle; and what isjustiliable in one
case, isjustifiable in the other: territorial im-
munity is as uiuch invaded and violated by
the hurniiig ofa but, as by desolating a prov-
ince. The punishureiit in either case, must,
of course, depend on circuiiistances, anti the
means of hint who has it in charge tostippress
piracy. The people and authorities ofFox-
ardo, by the iiirprisoniiieiit of an Anrerican
officer in pursuit of pirates, lost all respect for
their own character. by becoming, not only
the allies of pirates, but our open enemies,
and of course, were not only not entitled to
airy respect from me, but laid theiuselves lia-
ble to cliastisement, in the event of my means
justifying the enterprise, which the first law
of nature, selfpreservation, loudly called on
me to nii'cie.rtak_e,l'or fear their example should
become contagious, and much inconvenience
and bloodshed should become the consequence.

The oficers under my command have often
been eniployed on duty similar to that of
Lieiit. Platt, by my order: the orders given
by me to them, liave,:.iu every instance, been
in strictcouformity with those of the secretary
ofthe Navy; and they have the same right to
my protection in their execution. as Iconct-ive
I have to that ofthe Secretary of the Navy.
Without the assurance ofthis right, where is
the officer, let me ask, who would be willing
to execute the orders of his superior?

Acting on this principle, which is in accor-
dance with common sense and justice, I irri-
dertook the enterprise to chastise and intimi-
date the authorities of a town, who had for-
feited their character as allies to us,by becom-
ing the allies ofpirates and otrr open enemies;
as uiucli to prevent a repetition oftheoffence
they had coniniitted, as to assure those under
my command that they should receive every
countenance. support and protection frotii me
in the performance oftheir lawful duties, and
by that means encourage them to make lami-
able efforts to effect the objects for which the
expedition to suppress piracy was fitted out.
The manner of my performing this duty, I
trust, needs no apology ; it was done in a
way best calculated to prevent an efftision of
blood, and to secure the innocent inhabitants
froiu injury: the’object was effected in a
mattiier not only to satisfy the offit:ersi&. men
under my command, that redress under such
injuries was certain, but the people of Foxar—
do also, 8; others similarly situated,that nutri-
bers and distance were no security for them.

The spiking of their guns was a matter of
necessity. Had I not doire so, there can be
no doubt that some of us would have shared
the fate ofLieut. Cocke. who was killed from
the batteries of St. John’s, the capital of the
satire island in which Foxardo is situated, at a
time when the cha racter ofthe expedition anti
its object were both known to its Chief, for
which outrage no redress has yet been obtain-
ed, and which the strength of the place, and
the weakness ofthe force under my command
prevented my seeking, forcibly, at the time it
was committed.

It is almost useless to quote from writers on
international law to support the principles I
have stated to have guided me in my conduct
in relation to the affair at Faxardo ; btit, hav-
ing said that I have acted in conformity to
the laws of nations, it may be expected that I
should, by good authority, support my asser-
tlou.

Vattel is an author frequently quoted, and
his authority may be deenrevl a sufficieiit guide
for one who has all his life been engaged in
other pursuits than the study of international
law, and has been tiiore frcqtiently placed in
emergencies, when he has been under the ne-
cessity of resorting to the resources ofhis own
mind, than afforded the opportunity of refer-
ring to books as his guide.

By a reference to Book 3d, chap. 6th, sec.
94, ofVattel,.it is stated, that “ every associ
ate ofiiry enemy is indeed hiiriselfuiy enemy;
it matters little whether any one nrakes war
on me directly, and in his own name, or nir-
der the auspices of another; whatever rights
war gives me against my principal etiemy,the
like it gives me againstall his associatcs.”—-
On this principle, then, the authorities and
people of Foxardo became my enemies by
associating with my enemies; and whatever
right war gave me against the.pirates,'it gave
uie against Foxardo; and having this right, I
should have been perfectly jtistifiahle in mak-
ing good my threat to biirntlie town, ifit had
not been ransomed by suitable concessions, 81.
a promise on the part of the authorities, to
pursue in future, a different cotirse froui the
one that caused my visit there.

As the allies of Spain against the common
enemy, we had a right to its counteiiauce and
support, to the extent ofits means, in pursuit
ofpirates; we had a right, as allies, to cross
the territorial boundaries of Spain to pursue
them ; and in doing so, there was no cause
for offence on the part of Spain, the object
being lawful and usual taud re\sistaiice,tlierc-j
fore, to the exercise of this right, became an
offence on the part of Spain, and an injury to
us, of which we have a right to coinplaiu,and
to obtain redress.

Vatzel, says, “_ Nothing is more opposite to
the duties of huinauity, nor more contrary to
the society which sliotild be cultivated by na-
tions, than offences, or actions, which give a
just displeasure to others ; every nation,
therefore, should avoid giving any real of-
fence—I say a real; for, should he, who mati-
ifests a displeasure at our behavior, when we
are only using our rights, or fulfilling’ our du-
ties, he is to blame, not we.”

According to Vattel, not only Foxardo-—
not only Porto Rico, but Spain herself, is an-
swerable for the conduct of her subjects ; and
ifshe fails to restrain their mischievous and
base attempts, lays herself liable to the same
punishment as those who did the injury, and
it is the duty ofall nations to unite in treating
her as the common enemy of mankind. For
years past we have been suffering under the
injuries we have received from the people and
authorities of Porto Rico, and no redress has
been obtained from the mother country ;—
more perhaps from inability to restrain and

 

control her colonies, than from any want of

.0 Q

will on her part to do us justice. Porto Rico
mtist,therefore, be considered in a measure
indepe_ndent ofSpain, jsofarvthat Spain can-
not,or will not, prevent a repetition ofthe
injuries which have been the subject of corri-
plaint from us. We, therefore, have a right
to use the means we have nfobtainiug redress
or o finflicting'punish_meiit on her for injuries,
atonement for which is withheld from us ;—
and it is the duty of all nations to unite with
us, to treat, the people of Porto Rico as the
enemies ofthe lrumziri race.

According to Vattel, a nation or people,
knownto he ofa base and mischievous char-
acter, who have been in the frequent habit of
making injurious attempts, and who, by poli-
cy, manners, or niaxiins of governtneiit, en-
courages, accustoms, and authorizes its citi-
zens to deprepate on the property of others,
not only justifies reprisal, but authorizes the
nations injured by them to provide for their
own security by punishing the offender"; by
inflicting a punishment on hiui calculated to
deter him from like attempts, and deterring
others. The following quotation is so full
on the subject, that I deem it unnecessary to
offer any thing more in justification and in
support of the principles adopted by myself,
except to show that, what a nation may do,
may be done, and has often been done, by iti-
dividttals, acting on the presumed wishes of
the government to which they belonv. _ — .

Vattel, Book find, chap. /tlh, sec. 56. “ It
is safest to prevent the evil, when -it can be
done. A nation has a right to resist an inju-
rious attempt, and to make use of force and
every honest means against the power that is
actually engaged in opposition to it, and even
to anticipate its nrachiuatiotis, always observ-
ing not to attack it tipon vague and uncertain
siispicioris, in order to avoid exposing ilselflo
lrecorire an unjust aggressor. When the evil
is done, the same right ofsecurity authorizes
the offended to endeavor to obtain a coiuplete
reparation, and, iftiecessary, to employ force
for that purpose.” -

“ Iti short, the offended has a right to pro-
vide. for his security for the future, and to
punish the offender by inflicting on him a pain
capable ofdeteiring him afterwards front the
like attempts, and ofintimidatiiig those who
shall be tempted to iiuitate him. He may _e-
ven, if necessary, put the aggressor out of the
coirditioii toiirjure him. He makes use of
his right in all these measures, when guided
by reason ; and, ifany evil results from it_to
him who lays hiui under the necessity ofact-
ing thus, he can accuse none btrt his own in-
justice. If, then, there is, any where, a na-
tion ofa restless and mischievous disposition,
always re:-irly to injure others, to traverse their
designs, and to raise domestic troubles, it is
not to be doubted, that all have a riglir tojoin,
in order to repress, chastise, and pu‘. it ever
after outofits power to injure thenr.” _ ‘

In Book 3d, chap. t5th,sec. Q28. Vattel
lays it down as a general principle, “ That
there are occasions when the subject may
reasonably suppose the._,soiLe.reign’s will, anti‘
act in consequence of his tacit corninands.”
It was this principle that authorized and jus-
tified Commodore Dale to commence hostili-
ties against the Tripolitaiis, in 1801, when it
was believed that war was intended _by them ;
neither Coriiiirodore Dale nor Capt. Sterret,
the officer who tirade the first capture, were
censured, but to the contrary were highlyap-
plauded ; and the latter received the thanks
of C0l)t_'I'P.SS, and a sword, although, at the
time, war had not been declared against Tri-
poli. It was this principle that authorized and
justified Coinmodoie Rodgers in blockadlug
the port of. Tunis, and forcing the Boy to
terms, and afterwards drawing his ships tip
before the batteries at Tangier, audtlireateii-
ing hostilities to the Emperor of Morocco, in
the year 1805. It also authorized and justi-
fied Comuiodore Decatur, in threatening hos-
tilities to the Boy ufTunis, and the Bashaw
of Tripoli, in the year 1815, and forcing them
to restore large airiotiiits of money taken from
our citizens. Neither of these officers were
censured for conduct which they believed to
be in accordance with the wishes of the na-—
tion, although the United States had not de-.
clared war against those powers. 4

It is this principle that authorizes and jus-
tifies the oflicers commanding troops on our
distant frontiers, to coimneuce hostilities a-
gainst the Indian tribes, without declaration
of war on the part of the nation. They act,
in all cases, on its presumed wishes, and we
know of no iiistauce of censure.

 

It was this principle that authorized and,

jtistified General Jackson, without orders, to
take possession of Fort St. Marks, and after-
wards Pensacola, and to issue orders for the
destruction of the Negro Fort, on the Suwan-
nee. The interest of our country, the safety
of its citizens,the repose ofour frontier, re-
qnired'tliat he should do so. He acted on the
supposed will ofthe nation ; and, so far from
being censured, he has been rewarded with
the support of the government, and the ap-
plause of his country. In iiotorie ofthe cases
-cited, it is believed, had the ofiicers any in-
structions whatever, that authorized the act.
In the case of General Jackson, it is ex-
pressly stated by Mr. Adams,in his correspon-
dence with Mr. Forsyth, that the occupation
oftliese places in Florida, by Gen. Jackson,
“ was not by any order received by him from
the Governmen_t to that effect, nor with any
view of wresting the province from the pos-
session of Spain, nor in any spirit ofhostility
to the Spanish Government : that it arose fr.

"incidents which arose in the prosecution of

the war against the Indians ; from the im-
minent danger in which the- Fort of Saint
Marks was of being seized by the Indians
themselves, and from the tnanifestations of
hostility to the Uirited States,by the Com-
niandant ofSt. Marks, and the Governor of
Pensacola, the proofs of which were made
known to Gen. Jackson, and impelled him,
from the necessity of self-defence, to the step
of which the Spanish Gov’t. complains.”

I shall now proceed to point out the resem-
blance between General Jackson’s case and
mine ; and doubt not but it will ‘be agreed,
that the magnitude ofthe scale ofhis opera-
tion, and the comparative insignificance of
mine. do not change the principle; for,shonld‘
this be the case, I aiu tenfold criminal, in the

numerous fishing huts that I have destroyed
on the coasts ofCuba. For, to say that I am
-justified in destroying fishing huts for harbor-
ing pirates, but not to threaten the destruc-
lion ofa townjfor the same offence; while
Gen. Jackson for the sauie reason, isjustified
in ,possessing himself ofa proiince, is prepos-
terous. I have shown, before,‘ that the same
reasons thatjtistifies acting in the one case-,
would justify acting iii the other. That the
destruction ofthe ntimerotis fishing establish-
ments, and the breaking them up, almost en-
tirely, on the coast of Cuba, when suspected
ofgiving shelter to the common eneriiy, has
iiever been considered a violation ofterritory,
I have proofs, in the acknowledgement ofthe
Captain General, a very short time before
leaving the “fest Indies. to account for the
transactions at Foxardo ; he expresses hitti-
selfas follows:

“ Irevrel very sensibly, that you are about
to retire froiii- the conimand ofthe U. States’
forces in these seas ; not only from the able
manner in which you have discharged the
important duties which have been confided to
you, but from the just considerations with
which you have always respected the territo-
rial rights ofthe Island of Cuba. Permit me,-
sir, to offer my acknowledgments, and to avail
myselfoftbis occasion to confirm the assur-
ances of my high consideration and esteem.”

I have before sliowir, that the authorities 8:.
people of Foxardo, ‘should, injustice, not on-
ly he considered as the allies of the pirates,
btit as otir open enemies, did a decision
on their conduct rest only on the imprison-
merit of Lt. Platt, after his object and char-
acter were both made known ; but there are
proofs in the letter of Mr. Bergeest, that, on
two former occasions, in the case of Messrs.
Ellis, Cisbon, 8:. Co. and that of Messrs. Ber-
Eeest agd Uhlliorii, the goods were traced to
Foxardo, recovered, and the perpetrators de-
tected. Foxardo could, therefore, be consid-
ered only as a piratical reiitlezvons, and I
should have been perfectlyjustifiable in treat-
his it as such by its total destruction. But not
wishing to proceed to such extremities, if a-
tonenient for the past, and security for the fu-
ture,cotild be obtained by milder means; and
as the enterprise was undertaken,as my whole
conduct shows, in no hostility to the Spanish
Govermnent, nor with a desire to punish the
lfl"ocent,who must necessarily have suffered by
the destruction of the town, I tried amicable,
before I resorted to forcible means, to obtain
the satisfaction which the violence and insult
offered to my country, in the person ofone of
its ofiicers, loudly demanded. “By all the
laws ofneutrality and war, as well as of pru-
dence and htimanity,” I was warranted in
chastising and intimidating the authorities 8:.
people ofFoxardo; I was warranted in taking
ineasures to prevent injury to me, and those
under my command. seeing that injury was
intended, by spiking their guns ; and which,
as appears by Lt. Barton’s testimony,was not
done, until the batteries were manned, and
the guns. trained on our vessels, (all bearing
the Aiiieican fiag,) with evidentjdesign oflios-
tility. I was warranted, in fact, in anticipat-
ing my enemy.

“ There will need (says Mr. Adams) no ci-
tations froni printed treatises on international
law, to prove the correctness ofthis,prir_iciple.
It is engraven in adaniaut on the common
sense of niaukind ; no writer upon the law of
nations ever pretended to contradict it—iione
ofariy reputation or authority ever omitted to
insert it.”

The manly vindication ofGen.Jackson, in
the following quotation, and from the satire
pen, would alone, in the absence of all iii-
strm:tions, and all other guides and lights on
the subject, have satisfied me ofthe propriety
of my conduct: .

“ He (Gen. Jackson) took possession there-
fore ofPensacola. and of the Fort Barrancas,
as he had done of St. Marks, not in a spirit of
hostility to Spain, but as a necessary meas-
ure of selfdefeuce, giving notice that they
should be restored, whenever Spain should
place comnianriers and a force there,able and
willing to fulfil the engagetrients of Spain to-
wards'the United States, of restraining, by
force,’ the Florida Indians from hostilities a-
gainst their citizens. The President of the
United States, to give a signal manifestation
of his confidence in the disposition of the
King ofSpain to perforni,wi-‘ii good faith,this
indispensable engagement,and to demonstrate
to the world, that neither the desire of con-
quest, nor hostility to Spain, had any interest
in the cotiricils of the U. States, has directed
the unconditional restoration to any Spanish
officer, duly authorised to receive them, of
Pensacola and Barrancas, and that of St.
Marks to any Spauisli force, adequate for its
defence against the attack ofthe savages.-—
But the President will ueith er iiifiict punish-
ment, nor pass a censure tipon Gen. Jackson
for that conduct, the motives for which were
founded in the purest patriotism, of the ire-
cessity for which he had the most immediate
and effectual nreans of forming a judgment,
and the vindication ofwhicli is written in ev-
ery page oftlie law of nations, as well as in
the first law of nature, self-defence. He thinks
it, on the contrary, due to the justice which
the U. States have a right to claim fr. Spain,
and you are accordingly instructed to demand

be instituted into the conduct_of Don Jose
Masat, Governor ofPensacola, and of Don
Francisco C. Luengo, Commandant at Saint
Marks, and a suitable punishment iirflicted

..upon them, for having, in defiance and viola-

tion of the engagements of Spain with the U.
States,aided and assisted these hordes ofsav-
ages in those very hostilities against the U.
States, which it was their official duty to re-
strain. This inquiry is due to the characters
ofthose officers themselves, and to the honor
ofthe Spanish Government.”

“Tire obligation of Spain t.\restrain, by
force, the Indians ofFlorida froiu hostilities
against the U. States and their citizens, is
explicit, is positive, is unqualified. The fact,
that for a series of years they have received
shelter, assistance, supplies, and protection,in
the practice ofsuch hostilities,from the Span-
ish commanders in Florida, is clear and tine-
quivocal. If, as the commanders,both at Pen-

sacola and St.Marks, have alleged, this has

ofthe Spanish Governirieut,that inquiry shall‘

l

VOL. Viil. N9. 16.,

‘ _, .- I ,_ i'\

been the. result oftheir weakness rather than
their will; if they-have assisted the Indians
agaiiist the U. States, to avert their hostiliqiga
front the province‘ which they had not su -
cient force to defend against them,it may serve
in some measure to exclilpate individually‘
those officers; but it must carry demonstra-
tioii irresistible to the Spanish Government,_
that the right of the U. States caii as little
compound with inipoteiice as with perfidy,and ‘-7
that Spain riiust immediately make her elec-
tion either to place aforceiu Florida, ade-
quate to the protection of her eiigagements,ot‘
cede to the U. States a province, of which
she retains nothing but the nominal posses-
sion, b_ut which is, in fact, a derelict open to
the occupancy of every eneriiy, civilized or
savage, of the United States, and serving no
other earthly purpose titan a post of annoy-
airce to them.” ,

Imight he-r_e let the matter rest, and it may
appear futile in me to give any other reasons
or authority for my conduct than thoseI_ have
cited, btit I havestill more cogent reasons-
than any I have yet stated : I acted not only
on the supposed wishes of the government 83
nation at large, loudly and repeatedly expres-
sed, btit on orders intended to have met the
case, and no doubt would have met it precise-‘"
ly, ifit could have ever been imagined that so
great an outrage could have been committed
by the authorities of any place, professing
friendship to the U. States, as was committed
on the person of Mr.’ Platt. "' It cannot be
presunied,(says my instructions) that the go-

veriiinent of any island will afford any pro- _

tection .or countenance to such robbers. It
nray, on the contrary, confidently be believed
that all governments, and particularly those
most exposed, will afford all means in-their
power for their suppressioii.” Yet -the gov-
ernment and people of Foxardo did not only

afford. “'protectiou and countenance” to pié -

rates, and so far from affording “ all means
in their power for their suppression,” did, to
cap the climax of their atrocity. seize, 5771'
prison, and insult, an American officer, while
in the execution of his lawful duties, 8:. while
acting in strict conformity with the orders of
the government ; thus loosing all respect for
their own c.haracter,and forfeiting the respect
ofothers, by identifying themselves autl inter-
ests with freebooter: and outlaws,aDd making
common cause with the enemies ofthe human
race against the civilized world.

If it is asked where I find the wishes and _
opinions ofthe nation and the governtnent so
often and so loudly expressed as tojustify my
operations at Foxardo, I answer, in the mes-
sages and communications of the Executive
to Coirgress at various tinies,the acts of Con-
gress for the suppression of piracy, reports Of
Committees, and speeches of members of
Congress ; in the petitions of the mercantile
part ofthe community to Congress,and to the
Executive, in the public prints, and in the
general seiitirrient ofthe body ofthe people.

The Constitution ofthe United States pre-
scribes no form for promulgating a declara-
tion ofwar. The publication ofthe act for-
tlre suppression of piracy was alone sufficient:
to make known to the world that war had
been formally declared by the United States
against the "pirates. A sqiiadrou was equip-
ped for the purpose ofpursuing them, with the
command oftvhichl was honored, and I sail-
ed with the prayers and best wishes of man-
kind in geireral. My orders, although drawn
up with great care, and which lay down cer-
tain general principles as my, guide, in my
operations against pirates and intercourse
with foreign" nations, omit to define to me
what is piracy. It becaine,therefore, neces-
sary for me to refer to such authorities as were
within my reach at sea, fora definition ofthe
term. Although the 10th article ofthe 8th
section ofthe Constitution empowers Con-
gress to define piracy, the laws ofthe United
States,except in those for the suppression of
the slave trade, and the acts of March third,
1819, and May 15th, 1820, are silent on the
subject.‘ It became, therefore, necessary to
seek fora definition in other authorities, a-
-mong writers on international law, to which
the act of March 8d refers. “ Pirates,” ac-
cording to Spiliiian, “are common sea rov-
ers, without any fixed place ofresidence, who
acknowledge no sovereign and no law, and
support themselves by 'pillage and depreda-»
tions at sea.” This definition is sufficiently
clear and precise with regard to pirates who
rove the ocean, have no fixed residence, and
who acknowledge no sovereign and no law,
but it does not describe the pirates whom it
was_inade my duty to search and encounter.

The following extract from the orders of
the Secretary ofthe Navy endeavours to de-
scribe the origin, nature, and character ofthe
system of piracy which I was sent to suppress,
differing essentially from Spilinan’s definition
but still omitting to define what is piracy.

“ The system of piracy which has grown
tip in the West Indies, has obviously arisen
fin. the war between Spain and the new gov-
erirmeiits, her late provinces inthis hemis-
phere, and from the linrited_‘forc_e in the Isl-
ands, and their sparse population, ‘many por-
tions of each being entirely uninhabited and
desolate, to which the active authority of the
Government does not extend. It is under-
stood that establishments have been made by
parties ofthese banditti in those uninhabited
parts to which they carry their
retreat in time ofdanger.”

The English statute enacts that “ all per- 

sons who set forth any pirates, or be assisting
to those committing piracy, or that conceal
such pirates, or receive airy vessels or gdods
piratically taken, shall be deemed accessary
to the piracy, and lsuffer as principals:”--
and declares that “ the trading with known
pirates, or furnishing them with stores or ain-
inuiiition, or fitting out any vessel I01’ ‘I181
purpose, or in any wise consulting, combin-
ing,confederating,or corresponding with them
shall be deemed piracy.” _
These authorities are a suflicient dt-.fi'iiitiot%*
ofthe system of piracy, as it really exists on,
the coasts of Porto Rico and Cuba, and‘ very-

justly “and properly hold the accessaries equal-‘ \

ly guilty with the principal. The authorities
of Foxardo were accessaries only,so far as we -
know, but as such, the laws for the suppres-
sion of piracy authorises hostilities against

plunder, and 

 

3.» ~.