but, if this should be the case, though I shall not dare to print my execrations, I shall be at perfect liberty to execrate, and to wait anxiously for the time, when baseness will bring down ruin upon itself.

DOMINION OF THE SEAS.

Sra,In a time like the present, when too many are desponding, and foreboding nothing but subjugation to their country, and when, in truth, the country can only be saved, by shaking off the leeches of faction, by essential reforms for restoring to cur constitution its proper vigour, and by the courage of the people, you are entitled to the warmest thanks of the nation, for your manly counsels. Go on, Sir, and you will soon convince every sound Englishman, that he who should compromise away a particle of our naval dominion, would be an enemy to his country; and that with ministers as courageous as our admirals, and an armed population as gallant as that of Buenos Ayres, which has compelled our evacuation of South America, we have nothing to fear. Who can be so short-sighted as not to see, that if we do not possess ourselves of the island of Zealand, Denmark, and Sweden too, must shortly be in the French and Russian alliance, adding to Buonaparté the maritime means of the whole Baltic for our annoyance? Nay, Sir, and if we cannot hold it, which I conceive to be doubtful, the taking of Copenhagen at present may only put off the evil day; but if the fleet fall into our possession, it will be so much saved from the grasp of cur enemy. If, however, not wholly bereaved of our senses, we shall not allow any temporary advantage we may gain in the Baltic, to divert us one moment from completely arming our population, although that must be attended with a sacrifice to the leeches to whom I have alluded; for if, to borrow an expression from your friend Sheridan, we give them arms to fight with, we must give them freedom to fight for; or it will be a matter of too much in difference to the lower classes, whether they shall be taxed to furnish a marriage portion to the daughter of a wealthy earl, and to pension the gentlemen of the Regiment" when out of place, or to pay a body of French troops for doing us the honour to superintend the police of England,-On the subject of naval pre-eminence, and the tone with which it ought to be maintained, I think you will approve of an idea in "The Trident," written by your friend Major Cartwright, that instead of that unmeaning piece of patch-work we call the

always to be wielded by one arm and "obedient to one will; and at the same "time it'shews the character of that power. to be naval. And then, again, as re"ferring to war, the sailors of the three "nations in this banner must see, that the "union of the three national spears con"stitutes the very sceptre of the sea; "whence, by an association the most na "tural, and the most flattering to the hu man mind, will spring a determination to "make it such. Seeing in their flag

• Dominion's symbol, and bright glory's sign ;' "and seeing wrapped in that flag the very "existence of their country, what enemy, "what force, what superiority of numbers, "would be able to wrest it from them?"THE TRIDENT AT THE MAIN! what an object of ambition to a British officer?" "On the copper coin of the kingdom, bearing his Majesty's image and super. scription, the trident has for some time graced the hand of Britannia; and we believe that Buonaparté, in the prelimi"naries of peace, has been perfectly silent on this assumption.-On Cæsar's penny, "the meanest currency of the shop, what can be the beneficial effect of introducing "the trident? But, borne at the mast "head, how it must fire the naval mind, "and keep alive that heroic spirit which "placed it there! Whatever of this kind "we think fit to do, let it be done with

66

dignity. If we are to use the trident at "all as a national symbol, let it not be "slipped into the meanest medium of ex"change, to be chucked from hand to hand "in the low commerce of the pot-house; "but wave aloft in air at the admiral's flag: "staff, to beget high thoughts and great "actions."-- Perfectly agreeing, Sir, with you, that England has nothing to fear but from the corruption of her own factions, if the wise, the virtuous, and the brave will but unite, small as the band may at first. be, the time is not distant when the nation will hail them as its deliverers, and which must be the fact whenever that nation will take their advice.ALBION. Supt. 15, 1807.

DOMINION OF THE SEAS.

SIR,-The impartiality for which you are so justly praised, will, I hope, indice you to insert in your Register, a few obser vations in opposition to the doctrine which you maintain on the important subject of our naval superiority.-The grand principle on which you and those who have followed you on the same subject, maintain the right of this country in the power which it assumes over neutral flags at sea is," that force alone confers right in affairs wherein nations are concerned." This proposition I never can accede to, and do contend that occupancy or first possession confers right. The Omnipotent Being, when he created the world, gave to man dominion over the sea and earth, and endowed him with reason to see good from evil, and to do justice and avoid injustice. That reason shews that it is just for man to enjoy those gifts, or that portion of them which he can first seize on, and that it is unjust and contrary to the will of the All Benevolent Donor to molest him in that enjoyment. This dictate of reason is written in characters as legible as that which shews the injustice of depriving another of the gift of life, and would have pointed out to Cain the injustice of depriving his brother Abel of his flocks, or other possessions which he had acquired, as well as of his life. It is on this foundation that all separate and exclusive enjoyments of property is erected; for, on what other ground can it be supported, that one man should be intitled solely to posgess this or that portion of land, than that he derived it from the first man who had the good fortune to gain possession of it? If this argument stood in need of elucidation, the laws relative to real property in this kingdom would furnish one wherein it will be found, that cases might and frequently did occur, of real occupancy in lands, before it was put an end to by a late act of parliament. When an estate was granted to one man for the life of another, or in our law jargon, when a man was seized of an estate, pur autre vie, end died during the life of cestui que vie, the principles and rules of our system of real property, would not suffer this estate to go to the heir. What then was to become of it? the granter of the estate was not intitled to it; for the period during which he had granted it away (namely, the life of the cestui que vie was not at an end. And there being no. owner, it of course was in the same situation it was before it became the exclusive proper ty of an individual or individuals; namely, in common, and the first person who entered on the property and took possession of it was entitled to the enjoyment; and it would have

been unjust if another more. powerful had entered and turned him out by torce. It was the accupancy or first possession which conferred the right, and the force of one stronger than himselt could not have de-, prived him of it. It might, indeed, have taken away the possession of the land, but that would not have deprived the first occupont of the right, and transferred it to the ejector. It would have been a mamfest act of injustice, not because it is prohibited by act of parliament, or by the common law of the land, to be collated in Coke or any writer on the subject; but, that it is disso-. nant to that common feeling of right which, all rational beings possess. And on that ac count the law of England would have granted redress, by re-establishing the first occu pant in the possession of the property. This estate by occupancy is destroyed, as I stated. before, by act of parliament, which enables the owner of the estate pur autre vie, to diss. pose of it by his will, and in default of such disposition, confers it on the executors for administrators to be disposed of as the personal estate. A case of ancient occupancy may be found in the scriptures, where our forefathers, it will be seen, occupied a portion of land as long and no longer than it afforded. pasturage to their flocks. When that was exhausted they removed to some other convenient spot; but we no where find that they were ever expelled by a stronger power than themselves, or that they were molested in the peaceable enjoyment. An instance of occupancy at this day occurs at the Theatres, where the person who fi stakes possession of a seat acquires a right to it; and if he is de-. prived of it by force, he is deprived of it unjustly, and the law will punish him for the assault. Another modern instance of occu-› pancy is this, when a fisherman is exercising. his profession on any part of the sea, he by. taking possession acquires a temporary ex-· clusive right in that place, and if he is deprived of it by force, the person who so de-. prives him does not acquire a right, but he acquires a possession by wrong. Other in stances occur to me, such as ships acquiring a right to our docks and rivers, to the parti cular spots where they first take possession; but I will enlarge no further on this part of the subject. Does not all this prove that all those gifts which were designed in com-mon for all mankind, become the right-of those who first take possession or occupancy of them? And, consequently, that those vessels which are on the sea acquire a temporary right to that part of, it which they occupy, and that it is uninst to deprive them or mo

lest them in the enjoyment of it? Wi..re

mon law does involve it in mystery,--Bracton upon the subject of alienage and expatriation, says, (lib. 5, fol. 415, 427) that the exception to a man by reason of alienage, propter defectum nationis, should rather be propter defectum subjectionis; he does not expressly state that a man cannot be absolved from, or exchange his allegiance, nor can such inference be drawn from this passage; he observes, that an exception to a man that he is an alien ought not to be alledged, propter defectum nationis, by reason of a defect of birth in another country than England, not subject to the power and authority of the king, because it may be intended, that although he was born in another nation, he may be a subject; for he may be naturalized or otherwise subject to the King of England; but it must be alledged propter defectum subjectionis, by reason of a defect of subjection, an expression admitting of no ambiguity, no doubtful construction, but directing us to a plain manifest conclusion, viz. that at. the time of the allegation of his incapacity, he is not then actually subject to the king, which does admit that though he may have been once subject to a certain power, he may not be subject to that power all his life time. If this conclusion is correct, the power he is subject to allows him the means of expatriating himself.- -Coke in his Commentary (129 a) states, "nemo patriam in quâ natus est, exuere, nec ligeantiæ debitum ejurare possit;' which doctrine he considers to be laid down in the case of Dr. Storie (13 Eliz. Dyer, fol. 3005); but, instead of an express determination upon a well grounded principle, it seems to be a mere dictum. From this solitary decision or dictum, which soever it be, we cannot be justified in adopting the passage in Coke, or holding his opinion, however respectable, to be conclusive, as we do not find that this case of Dr. Storie has ever been acted upon or brought into view as a settled doctrine. I bring into view, Mr. Cobbett, all the material passages that occur to me, whether for or against the principle of expatriation. I wish to have that settled which from the various opinions declared upon the subject, seems involved in obscurity; and you will agree with me, that we cannot have a better time to set the sub; ject at rest, than upon the negociation of a new treaty with America; and which, I hope, will contain a declaratory clause upon the subject in doubt, either admitting or expressly disallowing a natural born subject of Great Britain and Ireland to expatriate himself and to become a citizen of America. If we refer to the Statute Law of England, we: shall find that the subject matter of doubt

has been differently handled, as the political interest of the country might occasionally require. By the statute of 14 and 15 Henry 8th. chap 4, it appears that subjects of England in this reign went into Holland, Zealand, Brabant, Flanders, and into other countries of foreign princes, and were there sworn to the obedience of such foreign sovereigns; wherefore, it was enacted, that all subjects born in England, and sworn to be subjects of foreign princes as long as they shall so abide, and be subject to foreign princes, shall pay customs, &c. in England, as other strangers pay. This statute is a general one, and concerns all the king's subjects, by which it is implied that persons may become subjects to other powers, and that by such election to depart from their natural allegiance they become, and it does seem to me properly so, aliens to their native country for so long time as they shall chuse to continue their new subjection; but, if they elect to become subjects again to England, they may have the king's writ, which will entitle them to be reinstated in all their former rights and immunities as Englishmen, upon their residing again in England. The next material statute is in the reign of James the First (3 Jac. 1 cap. 4 sec. 18, 22, 23), which enacts, that if any natural born subject he withdrawn from his allegiance, as therein mentioned, he shall be guilty of high treason. The 18th section of that statute refers to persons serving any foreign prince which bears relation to military men. The 22d section adjudged it treason for any per son to seduce Englishmen to become subjects, to another country; this, I think, implies it had been the usage theretofore to withdraw their allegiance, and at that time it was found expedient to stop the extensive progress it was making by the above statute, which in the latter section clearly admits the right of expatriation. And the 23d section makes it in the like manner penal for any person to become subject to another coun try, within the meaning of the 22d section. If, therefore, the person withdraws his alle giance of his own mere motion, and not at the request or solicitation of another, or is seduced by that other person, I apprehend he is not subject to the penalty of high treason, enacted by the statute, as the 23d section expressly says, any such person as

aforesaid, withdrawn as aforesaid," it therefore, does not essentially disannul the implication and inference of the statute of Henry. The next and last statute which I shall mention, was made in the reign of George 1st. (5 Geo. I. chap. 27) and relates to artificers, an indefinite and very general