304 ORAL ARGUMENT OF SIR CHARLES RUSSELL, Q. C. M. P. 



of the enterprise was seen, and its obligation was daily increased by other con- 

 siderations ol' high importance, already mentioned, which were d( enied sufficiently 

 strong in tlienisclves to dictate the course which has been pursued. 



Early intimations having been received of the dangerous purposes of these adven- 

 turers, timely precautions were taken by the establishment of a Force near the St. 

 Mary's, to prevent their eii'ect, or it is probable that it would have been more sensibly 

 felt. 



Then on the next page: 



For these injuries, especially those proceeding from Amelia Tslnncl. Spain wonld 

 be responsible, if it was not manifest that, although committed in the latter instance 

 through her territory, she was utterly unable to prevent them. Her territory, how- 

 ever, ought not to be made instrumental through her inability to defend it to purposes 

 so injurious to the United States. To a country over -which she fails to maintain 

 her authority, and which she permits to be converted to the annoyance of her neigh- 

 bors, her jurisdiction for the time necessarily ceases to exist. The territory of 

 Spain, will, nevertheless, be respected, so far as it may be done consistently 

 1084 with the essential interests and safety of the United States. In expelling 

 these adventurers from these posts, it was not intended to make any conquest 

 from Spain, or to injure in any degree the cause of the colonies. Care will be taken 

 that no part of the territory contemplated by the law of 1811 shall be occupied by a 

 foreign Government of any kind. 



You will see at once what the case was. 



Lord Hannen. — Is not the substance of it this: There being no 

 responsible Government to which recourse could be had for redress, 

 direct war was made upon these people? 



Sir Charles Russell. — Certainly; and they were adventurers, 

 usurping authority in two places, part attached to American territory, 

 part attached to the State of Louisiana, with regard to which they 

 were in negotiation with Spain, at the very time, for the acquirement 

 of the territory, and which they afterwards acquired. They were, if I 

 may use that expression, land pirates. 



Mr. Justice Harlan. — Sir Charles, it may be worth stating that 

 under the Constitution of the United States only Congress can declare 

 war. 



Sir Charles Russell. — That I had also recollected. It is impor- 

 tant, undoubtedly, in that connection. I supposed it had declared war, 

 though I do not know for certain. 



Mr. Justice Harlan. — I do not remember that it had. 



Sir Charles Russell. — It did not treat this party as a real bellig- 

 erent. It treated it rather as a case of land pirates. 



The President. — It was rather an act of military execution than of 

 belligerency, I should say. 



Sir Charles Russell. — That may be so — quasi-belligerency, in 

 point of fact, I suppose. 



What I wish to point out is this. I am obliged to Mr. Justice Harlan 

 for reminding me of what I in fact knew, that the assent of Congress is 

 necessary to the conclusion of a Treaty and to a declaration of war; but 

 whether it was war formally declared or not, I wish to point out that 

 my learned friends, in citing this case, have themselves treated it as 

 belligerent, because the sentence on page 152, begins with these words: 

 "A helligerent may " — 



The President. — That is a quotation from Mr. Wharton, I believe. 



Mr. Phelps. — All those quotations are from Mr. Wharton. They 

 should be in quotation marks. 



Sir Charles Russell. — Yery likely that is so. I accept it. What 

 I am calling attention to is this : 



A 'beUigerent may under extreme necessity enter neutral territory and do what is 

 actually necessary for protection. 

 And he cites the case of Amelia Island, in respect to which he says: 



