HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.slavery/ssactsengr0392 and id is 1 raw text is: consider, that whatever some particular persons may think of these principles, they
are principles most conducive to the peace and tranquillity of the world ; for no
worse state of things can be known to the practice of nations in the conduct of their
hostilities than this, that when a country is unfortunately engaged in a war with
any other, it must consider itself as unavoidably at war with the whole world.
In applying the principles of law to the facts of this case, I have only the support
of my own imperfect judgment. I should have been glad if any such dis-[422]-
tinctions had been pointed out, as could have justified me to vary the judgment
which it is my duty to pronounce-but I can arrive at no such conclusion. When
and how this judgment may operate as to its ultimate effect, whose purse may really
suffer, is totally foreign to the legal consideration of the matter. To future cases
the treaty which has been concluded between the two countries will supply a law.
It has been my duty to apply the law, by which these nations were bound before the
Treaty, and to which all other nations not parties to the Treaty continue to be
subject. Looking to the whole circumstances of the case, and to the principles
which it is my duty to apply, I feel myself compelled to pronounce the same judg-
ment which I was under the necessity of applying to the former case.
Condemned.
THE DESIREE -(Deplaney, Master). Dec. 13, 1803.-Flag-eighth, allegation
admitted.-Objection, That the Andromeda and the ships put under her
command by the Admiralty, were to be considered as employed on a distinct
and separate service, and as independent of the station at the Downs, over-ruled.
This was a question on the admission of an allegation on the part of Admiral
Lutwidge, claiming his flag-eighth in this prize, being a French frigate, of thirty-
eight guns, captured on the coast of France by His Majesty's ship of war the D art.
The allegation stated the appointment of Admiral Lutwidge to be Commander
in Chief of His Majesty's ships employed in the Downs, 29th March 1799, That he
so continued at the time of capture : That the limits of that station or command
in the Downs were always considered to be from the North Fore-[423] -land to Beachy
Head, on the English Coast, and from West Capel on the Dutch coast to Dieppe:
That His Majesty's ship 'Andromeda' was duly placed under his command by
the Admiralty, 14th April 1800, and so continued to the 2d of August following:
That on the 18th April 1800, Admiral Lutwidge ordered a squadron of ships Ito
proceed off Dunkirk, under the command of the 'Andromeda,' Captain Inman :
That the 'Andromeda' having sprung her bowsprit, was afterwards ordered by
Admiral Lutwidge to leave the command to the ' Babet,' and return to the Downs,
and on her arrival was sent off to the Little Nore, for the purpose of taking on board
a bowsprit, with orders then to return to her anchorage in the Downs : That whilst
the 'Andromeda' was at the Nore, the Lords of the Admiralty having a secret
service to perform against the force of the enemy then lying at Dunkirk, did (by
orders termed most secret, 17th June 1800), inform Captain Inman, that they had
ordered the fire-ships, ' Wasp,' ' Falcon,' ' Rosario ' and ' Comet,' then lying
at the Little Nore, to put themselves under the command of Captain Inman, and
directed Captain Inman to proceed to sea, and perform such secret service, and
return to the Downs with the ships and vessels under his command, and to transmit
an account of his proceedings to the Admiralty : That Captain Inman proceeded
from the Nore to the Downs, and there consulted with Admiral Lutwidge about the
means of putting the orders into execution, and was by him appointed to resume
the command of the squadron of Dunkirk, and sailed on the 23d June for that pur-
pose : That on the 24th June the Admiralty sent a massage to Admiral Lutwidge,
requiring to be in-[424]-formed if he had received any intelligence from Captain
Inman, and that a correspondence ensued between Admiral Lutwidge and the
Admiralty respecting that service : That on the 25th June Admiral Lutwidge did,
in consequence of an application from Captain Inman, and with permission of the
Admiralty, dispatch the 'Teazer' and 'Boxer' gun-brigs under his - command to
join Captain Inman, and by them sent a letter to Captain Inman, directing him that
in case the vessels that were to join from the Nore should not pass through the Downs,
he should deliver to them the inclosed orders, first filling up the names, directing them
to put themselves under his command: That such a practice of issuing blank orders
to be filled up by an inferior officer is not unusual : That in consequence of these
THE D ESI REE
662
4 C. ROB. 422.](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0392&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)