Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

state of cultivation to afford more than sufficient means of subsistence for three times the number of settlers; what right, let me ask, can such settlers have to refuse to an half-starved traveller the liberty of supporting himself by such surplus produce, or of adopt

tion? If right be a virtue, and synonymous with justice and equity, which I have always considered it, I can discover pone in the instance I have put. What! is accident to be said to confer a right in one man to starve another? Such an idea is revolting to the judgment. All this imaginary right then, resolves itself in this; that when accident has placed me in a more fortunate situation than my neighbour, policy dictates, that I should use my best exertions to preserve my post against his and other aggressions. How absurd it is to suppose that the navigator who happens to discover an island in some hitherto unknown portion of the sea, suffi. cient for the support of a multitude of inba• bitants, should by landing a few seamen upon it, thereby become possessed of the right of maintaining it against all the world, Having had the advantage of finding this uninhabited spot, if he can pursue the advantage, and prevent others from possessing themselves of it, it may be very well, but, to talk of a right, as if it were a divine right, which it would be unjust and impious to deprive him of, is perfectly farcical. The practice of nations fortifies this opinion. When a Portuguese discovered the Brazils, what did Portugal do? Merely inform the other European powers, that by the discove

civilised society will feel it an imperious.duty to observe, however he might neglect them with impunity. What is termed the Law of Nations then, I look upon, to be such rules as wise and just men have considered, most conducive to the integrity and prosperity of nations, having for its basis, that greating a part of that spot for his local habitaprinciple of self preservation, which the Lawgiver of the Universe, has for the wisest of purposes, implanted in the whole animal creation. The consideration of what is just or unjust as between man and man, has by analogy, led such authors as Grotius, Puffendorff, Vattel, and others, to consider what is the duty, or rather, what line of conduct ought to be observed between one state or society and another, and such rules as they. have judged equitable between nation and nation, and most likely to preserve the integrity of each, they have detailed under the appellation of the Law of Nations. With respect to the tribunal which must enforce. the observance of these rules, the interest of the whole creates such tribunal, by producing a confederacy of the different states for that purpose. If in society, it would be daygerous to its welfare, to permit one member to be refractory with impunity, so among states, it would equally endanger their existence, if one were permitted to act contrary to the policy of the whole. Self preservation then, that great cement of society, would, so long as the different powers were pretty well balanced, have enforced an obe servance to these rules or laws; but when once a power like France became capable of violating those rules, without the possibility of punishment, I admit with you, Mr. Cob-ry they had the right; and to that they all bett, that the law of nations was from that moment dissolved, and that the states of Europe must be considered as no longer called upon to act upon that system, which there is no balance of power to maintain against violation. Thus much for the Law of Nations. Now, your correspondent contends that"occupancy or first possession con fers right," in opposition to your principle, "that force alone confers right. Now, it occurs to me, that "* right" in both propositions is improperly used; I neither think that occupancy confers right, nor that force confers it. It seems to me, that all that era be advanced is, that occupancy gives an ac cidental advantage, which force alone must maintain; but that neither occupancy hor force, have any thing to do with right. Sup pose an association of men emigrating to South America, and that while wandering there, they should find a considerable terri tory uninhabited, of which they take possession, and that the spot so possessed, is in a

assent? No! She sends out a force to maintain the advantage which accident has given her; colonizes the place, and fortifies it with garrisons, and other means of defence; but, if it were an acknowledged right, and so recognized by all civilized nations, such precautions would have been superfluous, and merely an insult to the other powers. The principle of the Dominion of the Seas comes then, merely to this; that as from acciden tal circumstances we have become the occn piers of this island, and that we tolerablywell approve the spot, common prudence dictates that we should adopt the best and safest mode of preserving it, and as Buonaparte's im mense territorial acquisitions are such, that we are in imminent danger of being over whelmed by his troops if he had any means of transporting them, we are urged by every ray of BEASON and POLICY to maintain the Daminion of the Seas; and every argument to the contrary seems to droop under the pressure of its own folly. Thus much for

the Dominion of the Seas"EXPATRIA TION OF BRITISH SUBJECTS." The writer upon this subject has advanced a doctrine, that may suit the policy of some Englishman having a considerable property in the American funds; but, that it is a doctrine either consistent with the safety of any nation, or compatible with the judgment that the most superficial consideration affords, is, what I must be permitted to deny. A Frenchman in defence of revolutionary principles, in a revolutionary age, has advanced an absurd opinion which your correspondent has given Aus, and which is in substance this, "That a citizen, as an inhabitant of the world," (I cannot help observing by the way, that this chimerical Frenchman is an enemy to the idea of occupancy conferring a right, as upon that principle, it would be difficult to make out that every citizen is an inhabitant of the world,)" preserves a sort of natural liberty "to renounce his allegiance to his king and

"

country when he pleases, and to become "the adopted citizen of another with equal "facility; without which liberty man would "be really a slave;" that is, that when a man has been reaping for years all the benefits and privileges which the laws of the country in which he has resided has afforded him, and after he has realised a pretty large fortune, (the emoluments of some situation that have been paid out of the hard earnings of the people), he is to be at liberty to ship off the property to some foreign country, and return when he pleases afterwards, with a band of ruffians, to plunder us of our property and cut our throats. Now, this doctrine, says your correspondent S. V. is "certainly consonant to reason," and why it should not be adopted generally, and the spirit of it incorporated with the Law of Nations, he cannot conceive. Is it possible, Mr. Cobbett, for the most uncivilized wretch, or the most licentious of libertines, to promulgate a doctrine more repugnant to integrity, gratitude, and humanity than this? Were there no other memorial, characteristic of a Frenchman's disposition, this alone would indelibly stamp the truth of Voltaire's description of his countrymen, that in "that in "their exterior they are monkies, and in "their hearts tigers." In opposition to this Frenchman's doctrine, we have that of Sir E. Coke, that no man can divest himself of his allegiance to the country in which, he is born, S. V. who has given us this as well as the fornier quotation, observes, that he fitids upon investigation, that it was only a dictum of Sir E. Coke's. What is the doctrine, let me ask, of the Frenchman, Picquet; is that any thing more than a dictum ?

God forbid that it should! If there be no black letter of the law, by which a Briton's incapacity of expatriating himself is laid down, it is, that the understanding of every man must have rendered it unnecessary. Only imagine, Sir, the case of a temporary dissatisfaction prevailing in a nation, and that inflamed with the intrigues of a country who has her destruction in view, and that every inhabitant was permitted to expatriate himself at pleasure, and shake off his allegiance; what is to become of the country in such a crisis? The fact is, that no reasonable man, unconnected with the interests of a foreign country, and having the welfare of his own nearest his heart, can for one moment entertain a doubt of the impropriety of such doctrine as that insisted upon by S. V. The only authority of S. V. (if it be not misusing the term when applying it to M, Pecquet) is the opinion of that French revolutionist, the foundation of whose opinion as stated by himself, is an insidious sophism: he says, unless a subject can shake off his allegiance he is really a slave. Why, no doubt every citizen of a country is subservient to the laws of that country; all governments being public compacts to which each inhabitant is a member; and as far as such compact restrains the natural liberty of the member, he is so far dispossessed of his freedom; but, then it is to be considered, that he has exchanged that freedom for some supposed equivalent. Universal freedom is inconsistent with political society. For the government of every society, however small, there must be laws, and in proportion as each member of the society is affected by those laws, so far he is deprived of his natural liberty; but whether that is a situation which the understanding contemplates when speaking of slavery, I leave to the judgment of the impartial reader. I presume, Mr. Cobbett, that your only object for inserting the letter of your expatriating correspondent, was to expose to your readers the danger of listening to the subtleties of those gentlemen who are so prone on all occasions to depre. cate an American war, and to abuse this nation for every exertion in favour of her independence; if so, I agree with you, Sir, that the letter of S. V. has been peculiarly fitted for the purpose; though when I call to my mind the observation of that same Lord Coke, who says," interdum fucata falsitas in multis est probabilios, et sæpe rationibus vincit nudam veritatem," I almost question the philosophy which has yielded to its publication. CANDIDUS.

Lincoln's Inn, Sept. 22.

[ocr errors]

DOMESTIC OFFICIAL FAPERS. BUENOS AYRES. From the London Gazette Extraordinary, dated Downing street, September 12, 1807. į (Continued from p. 473.) Alstract of Ordnance of Stores, captured from the Enemy in the Suburbs and City of Buenos Ayres, on the 2d and 5th of Juły, 1897.

43 Garrison and field pieces of different calibres, and mounted on travelling carriages. -About 25,000 round shot for field pieces, of various calibres; and about 1000 shells for mortars of various natures; and an arsenal, containing every description of ammunition and military stores; of which a return will be given as soon as possible. (Signed) AUG. S. FRAZER, Capt. Horse Artillery, Commanding. To his Exc. Lieut Gen. Whitelocke,

Commander of the Forces.

Admiralty Office, Sept. 12, 1807. Dispatches, of which the following are copies and extracts, have this day been received at this office from Rear Admiral Murray, addressed to William Marsden, Esq.

eaptured at Monte Video;) the Medusa, Nereide, and Thisbe to receive the seamen intended to land, and 3 boats from each of the line of battle ships.-On the 21st, the wind moderating, I shifted my flag to the Nereide, and Gen. Whitelocke did me the honour of accompanying me; and having directed Capt. Bouverie, in the Medusa, and Capt. Shepheard, in the Thisbe, to proceed with the Rolla and Olympia, and the last di vision of the troops, at noon weighed and stood to the southward, where we anchored in three fathom water- -Oa the 24th we anchored between Ensinada de Barragon and the northern shore, the winds and weather having prevented our getting to the westward of the Oltez Bank before. The General and myself finding time would be lost by going with this division tó Colonia, sent for the troops to join at this anchorage; Gen. Gower went for them, with orders from Gen. Whitelocke to evacuate, Colonia, if he thought it necessary; Colonia was accordingly evacuated.--On the 27th the troops from Colonia joined, with the Fly, Pheasant, Haughty, and the gun boats. I ordered the Paz up the river, with directions to the Staunch and Protector gun brigs to join me.-The transports having the troops and artillery on board, being in three divisions, I directed Capt. Thompson, in the Fly, who had made himself acquainted with the river, and particularly the place intended for landing, which was near Barragon, to lead the first division, having with him the Dolores schooner and 4 gun boats; Capt. Palmer, in the Pheasant, to lead the second division, with the Haughty and 2 gun boats; and Capt. Prevost, in the Saracen, to bring up the rear of the third division; Captains Bayntum and Corbet to superintend the landing of the troops.-At day light on the 28th, the wind being favourable, I made the signal to the Fly to weigh with the first divi sion, and immediately after a general signal to weigh, having ordered the Rolla to be placed on the west end of the bank, as a guide to the ships to join. I shifted my flag to the Flying Fish, and Gen. Whitelocke went in with me. As soon as the first divi sion of transports anchored, I made the signal to get into the boats, and immediately afterwards to put off-Soon after 9 A. M. the first boats, with Brig. Gen. Craufurd's division, landed about a mile to westward of the fort, from which the enemy had some time before withdrawn their guns. (To be continued.)

Nereide, off Barragon, June 30, 1807. Sir,I did myself the honour of informing you, by the last opportunity which sailed from Monte Video, of my proceeding from St. Helena until my arrival off Monte Video with the squadron and transports under my orders, a duplicate of which letter I now transmit.-Rear Admiral Stirling had made every necessary arrangement for the intended expedition before my arrival; it being necessary on account of the shoals in the river, that the line of battle ships should remain at anchor off Monte Video, as well as for the protection of that place, I directed Admiral Stirling to remain with them.-On the 17th inst. the second division of troops, consisting of all those who had come out with Gen. Craufurd, being ready to proceed to Colonia, where Gen. Whitelocke wished the whole to be assembled, Capt. Prevost, in his Majesty's ship Saracen, taking with him the Encounter gun brig and Paz schooner, sailed with the transports.On the 18th, 213 marines of the squadron were landed at Monte Video, by request of the General, to strengthen the garrison. I likewise ordered 440 seamen to be ready to land, under the command of Captains Rowley, Prevost, and Joyce, with a proportion of officers to assist in working the artillery, to go up in the frigates, and Capt. Bayntun to proceed up the North Channel to Colonia, in the Hanghty gan; brig, with 6 gun boats; (Spanish prizes Printed by Cox and Baylis, No. 75, Great Queen Street, and published by R. Bagshaw, Brydges Et cet Covent Garden, where toomer Numbers may be had; sold also by. Budd, Crown and Mitre Fall Als♣

VOL. XII. No. 14.]

LONDON, SATURDAY, OCTOBER 3, 1807.

[PRICE 10D.

"The Adam and Eve of this young nation came out of Newgate."-Saying of a British Grenadier in 1776.

513]

SUMMARY OF POLITICS. DOMINION OF THE SEAS (continued from p. 422) Upon this subject, there was a letter, from a correspondent, inserted in the Register of the 19th of September, at page 429, which letter I should have answered, in my last, had it not been done in so able and complete a manner by my correspondent WROC, of Lincoln's Inn, whose admirable letter will be found at page 502. Thus is the ground of "occupancy, or first possession, completely demolished. -A second correspondent, under the name of CANDIDUS, at page 506, takes up the same subject, and he differs from me merely upon the propriety of my definition of law; but, he has not, I think, satisfactorly shewn, that it is proper to denominate law that which no tribunal can possibly enforce. "A law," says he, "is a rule of action, and I apprehend, that a conscien"tious man may lay down for himself a rule " of conduct, from which he will not deviate,

though there should be no tribunal that "could enforce his obedience." Very true, but, this is using the word law in a figurative sense; and, as to the force of such a law, as applied to the affairs of nations, it would, I think, be very difficult to discover, in the history of the world, any, even the slightest, traces of it. My correspondent says, that," as to the tribunal "for enforcing these rules, the interest of "the whole creates such a tribunal, by "producing a confederacy of the different

states for that purpose." But, here we revert to might again, to force, to mere power, to the " right of the strongest;" and, as I explicitly said before, the only defence of weak states consists in the opposite interests and the mutual jealousies of the strong ones -With respect to the present state of things, however, Candidas agrees with me, that one power having swallowed up all the others, upon the continent of Europe, the law of nations, or the rules

of conduct, were, from that moment, at an end, and that no state can now be called pon to act according to those rules. —— But, the chief reason for my reverting to this subject, at this time, was, that I thought

[514 it necessary to notice an article published in the Morning Chronicle of the 21st of September, which article I shall, according to a custom almost peculiar to myself, first submit to the perusal of the reader." A great deat "of most unfounded clamour has been raised "against the late Ministers, not only as having been willing to concede, but as having actually conceded, some of our 66 most importaut naval rights to the Ame"ricans. We venture to assert most positively, however, that in the Treaty "concluded in this country in the end of "last, or beginning of the present year, "not a single naval claim is conceded, and "that particularly the right of searching "for seamen is not given up. With re

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

spect to searching for seamen on board of ships of war, it neither has been exercised, "nor, from the nature of things, can it "be exercised, without necessarily leading

to disturbance and irritation that wonia "render peace between two countries little "else than a feverish expectation of actual 66 war. Regulations may be requisite to

prevent the seduction of our seamen by "the Americans, but the identity of language, &c. which renders regulation

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

necessary, would render the right of "search on board of ships of war the worst "possible remedy for the evil complained "ot.--We have contended that on this,

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

as well as other points arising out of what

we have been silly enough to call the "Laws of Nations, nations were to be con"sidered, as to their rights, as on a footing "of equality. For this position we have been "assailed in that ill-mannered tone of per

sonal invective, which now disgraces poli "tical discussion. We have been accused "of giving up the rights of the country, and

66

[ocr errors]

advocating the cause of our enemies. Nay, "the House of Lords itself, is censured "for not having negatived a motion, that "nations were entitled to be considered as equal, as to their rights.--Such extravagant language is perfectly suited to those "who contend that there is no law, by sea or land, but that of the strongest, and "who admit Bonaparte's right to subdue "the Continent, because he is able to do it,

[ocr errors]

P

"and recommend that Great Britain should "exact tribute from every ship that sails "the sea, because she is able to do it. Our "readers, however, cannot suppose that "such doctrines eyer were held by any "statesman or politician, or are likely to "be acted upon. The equality of nations

as to their rights, so far from being a new " or dangerous doctrine, is the doctrine by "which we have a Court of Admiralty

which determines causes by that very Law "of Nations which is called unmeaning jargon. We can have no better authority for this than Sir W. Scott, and those who have been so loudly reviling us, have "in reality been attacking the principles of that learned and respectable Judge.-"In giving judgment in the case of the "Maria (the case of the Swedish convoy), "Sir William Scott says, "In forming that

judgment, I trust that it has not one mo""ment escaped my anxious recollection ""what it is that the duty of my station ""calls from me; namely, to consider

"myself as stationed here not to deliver ""occasional and shifting opinions to 65 66 serve present purposes of particular

"national interest, but to administer "" with indifference that justice which the ““law of nations holds out, without dis""tinction, to independent states, some

"happening to be neutral and some to ""be belligerent. The seat of judicial Se cr authority is indeed locally here, in the "belligerent country, according to the "known law and practice of nations. "But the law itself has no locality. It

[ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]
[ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

rights in their seas, as the Venetiaus in "the Adriatic, and the Danes in the North; "and he is very well satisfied with Leing "able to make out a claim of a servitude "in our favour over the seas belonging to "the Danish sovereignty. To talk then of our "ancient sovereignty of the seas is an abuse "of the words. Indeed, though we had always claimed and obtained this sove-. reignty in the sense now alluded to, of a sovereignty over the whole ocean, it wou'd "avail nothing; for even when admitted " in the narrow seas, it never has enabled us to exert the right of searching ships of 66 war. If any proof of this were wanting, we might refer to the demand made by "Cromwell, in 1653, after a war ostensi"bly entered in for the honours of the flag, "and really originating in naval jealousy ; a 66 war, too, in which he had beat the Dutch "in seven great sea-fights. He demand"ed, as the ne plus ultra of maritime claims,

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

a right to visit Dutch ships of war in the "British seas. The Dutch, almost ruined, "and eager for peace, gave him all he "asked, except this; this they positively "refused, and the treaty 1654 was accord"ingly made without any such stipulation, "though it yielded the honours of the "flag in the narrow seas as fully as possible.

-If Sir W. Scott has now discovered "the right of searching ships of war (which we do not believe he has), most certain

[ocr errors]
« ZurückWeiter »