The President had decided that a murder committed on board a British frigate on the high seas, was within the jurisdiction of that nation, and consequently within the twenty-seventh article of its treaty with the United States. He therefore directed Thomas Nash to be delivered to the British Minister, if satisfactory evidence of the murder should be adduced. The sufficiency of the evidence was submitted entirely to the Judge.
If Thomas Nash had committed a murder, the decision was that he should be surrendered to the British Minister; but if he had not committed a murder, he was not to be surrendered.
Had Thomas Nash been an impressed American, the homicide on board the Hermione would, most certainly, not have been a murder.
The act of impressing an American, is an act of lawless violence. The confinement on board a vessel, is a continuation of the violence, and an additional outrage. Death committed within the United States, in resisting such violence, would not have been murder, and the person giving the wound could not have been treated as a murderer. Thomas Nash was only to have been delivered up to justice on such evidence as, had the fact been committed within the United States, would have been sufficient to have induced his commitment and trial for murder. Of consequence, the decision of the President was so expressed, as to exclude the case of an impressed American liberating himself by homicide. He concluded with observing, that he had already too long availed himself of the indulgence of the House, to venture farther on that indulgence by recapitulating or reinforcing the arguments which had already been urged.
When Mr. Marshall had concluded, Mr. Dana rose and spoke against the resolutions.
An adjournment was then called for and carried—yeas 50, nays 48.
Saturday, March 8.
Case of Jonathan Robbins.
The House resumed the consideration of the report made on Thursday last, by the Committee of the whole House, to whom was referred the Message of the President of the United States, of the seventh ultimo, containing their disagreement to the motion referred to them on the twentieth ultimo; and the said motion being read, in the words following, to wit:
(See ante—Mr. Livingston's resolution, February 20.)[53]