The great evil of these irregular and sanguinary proceedings is, that they shake to its foundation that system which regulates the intercourse of civilized nations, and which preserves a species of order even in the midst of war and confusion.

The charge on which Mr Ambristie was condemned, is, that he headed the Indians in their war against the troops of the United States. This, the prisoner acknowledges and justifies. On the other hand, it is stated in the sentence, to be "an established principle of the law of nations, that any individual of a nation making war against the citizens of any other nation, they being at peace, forfeits his allegiance, and becomes an outlaw and pirate. This is the case of Robert C. Ambristie, clearly shewn by the evidence adduced." Now, we confess we never heard of such a principle. On the contrary, it is a principle established, as far as the universal practice of the European states can establish any thing, that when two nations are at war, the subjects of neutral states may lawfully enlist as volunteers in any of the contending armies; and this principle has been frequently acted upon, and recognized, by almost every na tion in Europe.

The vague nature of the charge on which this individual was capitally arraigned, must also strike every one. It is so loose and general, that it may embrace the whole conduct of the individual accused, and every action of his life, which by implication, may be tortured into evidence of his guilt. The advantages which this gives to the malice of an accuser is obvious. Indeed, no man's life, however pure, could stand against accusations pointed against it from such a commanding position. There is no conduct which, up. on such a principle, calumny may not blacken, first by a vague accusation, creating a prejudice, and then distorting every circumstance to favour this

VOL. XI. FART I.

preconceived notion. We cannot conceive a more complete subversion of every rule and principle which we have been accustomed to hold essential to substantial justice, than is exhibited in this part of the procedure.

The evidence admitted was of the most exceptionable nature. One person is brought to prove the allegations against him, from a letter said to have been written by him (Mr A.) to an Indian chief. The witness who gave this evidence, could not swear that the letter was addressed to the Indian chief. There was no copy of the letter produced, nor even an attested copy of it, but simply the evidence of a person who said he had seen it, and who stated its contents from memory, but who could not swear that it was addressed to the said Indian chief. But this violation of all principle is even outdone by what follows; for one Hambly, a personal enemy, as it appears, of Arbuthnot, is allowed to state in evidence, that a certain Indian chief informed him that he was instigated to war by Arbuthnot. It is well known, that none of the Indians are entitled to credit, and accordingly, that their evidence is not admitted in any American court of judicature. But here we have not only this evidence, bad in its best form, admitted against the life of an individual, but admitted on hearsay. A more gross outrage against all the rules of judicial proceedings cannot be conceived.

But by far the worst feature of this case is, that the members of the Court, struck with the cruelty of their first decision, requested time to reconsider it, and, on due deliberation, they revoked the sentence of death, changing it into a lighter punishment. But this aversion to shed innocent blood did not, it appears, suit the temper of General Jackson; he disapproves the reconsideration of the sentence; and, in the face of a recorded judgment of a competent court, he executes this unhappy

Ο

victim of his relentless cruelty. We cannot conceive a more heinous proceeding: Such an act cannot be regarded in any other light than as a murder under the most flimsy disguise.

In the transactions of the American legislature for 1818, nothing occurs of any great or general interest. The amount of military force was fixed at 10,000 men, and the expences of the state for the year at 24,500,000 dollars. Various regulations were passed affecting commerce. Protecting duties were imposed on linen and cotton stuffs; and another measure was devised for retaliating on Great Britain the exclusion established by her Navigation Act, of all foreign vessels from her colonial ports. It was accordingly provided by the American act, that the ports of the United States should remain closed against every vessel owned wholly or in part by British subjects, coming from any port of Britain or her dependencies, which is shut against the vessels of the United States. This law appears to be in the strictest sense a measure of retaliation. It enacts nothing positive; but leaves it entire ly to the option of this country either to leave a free trade with the United States, or a restricted trade, or no trade whatever. If Great Britain allows American vessels to trade freely with her whole territories and dependencies, the same privilege will be extended to British vessels trading to America; but from whatever port American vessels are excluded by Britain, from the same port will all British vessels be interdicted from trading with America. Every restriction, therefore, which the navigation laws of this country impose upon the trade and shipping of the United States, virtually imposes a similar restriction on the trade and shipping of Britain; so that this measure of the American government is strictly a measure of retaliation. It breathes nothing hostile

and vindictive. It is not the less injurious, however, on this account, to the trade of this country, and it deserves to be considered, how far these exclusive enactments for the exclusion of our navigation can be regarded as politic, which draw down such heavy retaliations from other countries. If we monopolize our navigation, other nations monopolize theirs, and this narrow and exclusive policy thus becomes general. But it is surely not for the advantage of Britain that such a system should prevail. It is not congenial, either to her constitution, or to any part of her domestic policy. She has flourished in wealth and commerce, in consequence of the energy, enterprize, and talent of her inhabitants having a free range. Her progress in commerce excited the jealousy of other nations; and they imposed restrictions, because they were foiled in the contest. This conduct, on their part, was quite natural. Monopoly is the resource of the weaker party. It is the expedient of the indolent and unenterprizing, who call in the aid of force, because they have no chance when there is freedom. But it is not the policy of such a power as Britain, who has always outdone her rivals in fair and open competition. these general grounds, it seems evident, that Great Britain would always possess a navigation suited to her extensive commerce, and to the physical advantages of her position. No artificial exclusion will ever enlarge her navigation beyond this its natural size, and we greatly doubt, therefore, the policy of these enactments, however much they have been commended, the object of which is to exclude other nations from a fair competition with British industry and skill.

On

On the 16th November, the session of Congress was opened, as usual, by an address, or message, as it is styled, from the President. In this address

the President entered at large into an exposition both of the foreign and domestic relations of the United States; and in the commercial prosperity, the abundant harvest, and the improving revenue of America, he found ample topics for congratulation. With respect to Great Britain, he stated, that as the commercial stipulations which existed between them would expire in July following, the American minister had, according to his instructions, proposed a new treaty to the British government, which had been received in the most amicable manner. With regard to Spain, the President justified the transactions which had taken place in the Floridas, on the ground that these countries afforded a refuge to the Indians, who from thence issued forth to ravage and destroy the rising settlements on the American frontier. He stated, however, that the forts seized by the American troops would

be given up, when an adequate force appeared to take possession of them. The execution of Messrs Arbuthnot and Ambristie was adverted to in the most cautious terms; no opinion whatever was given as to that transaction; it was merely stated, that all the documents relating to it would be laid before the Congress for consideration. With regard to South America, the President expressed his firm determination to adhere to a strict neutrality between the contending parties. The remainder of the speech was occupied with matters relating entirely to the internal condition of the United States, the transactions with the Indians, the progress of the fortifications for the defence of the coast, and the increase of the navy. In conclusion, the Congress is congratulated in the accession of another state, namely, the Illinois; which was admitted in the course of the year into the American confederacy.

THE war which was undertaken in the year 1817, by the British rulers of India, for the extirpation of the Pindarees, involved them, as we have seen, in other contests with several of the native powers. But the feeble and ill-concerted league formed at that time by these powers for their common defence, was completely broken by the rapid and splendid successes of the British arms; and at the commencement of the year 1818, the conquerors of India had only to gather the fruits of their victories, and to prosecute the war which they had so auspiciously begun, to a successful conclusion.

The battle at Mehudpore terminated the war with Holkar, who signified his intention of submitting to such terms of peace as the British should dictate. These were, that he should place himself and his dominions under British protection; in other words, that he should forfeit his rank of an independent prince, becoming a dependent and ally of the British, without whose sanction he could engage

in no transactions with any foreign power, and to whom, when required, he should be ready to furnish a contingent of 3000 horse. These, with some territorial cessions, formed the chief provisions of the treaty. By the submission of Holkar, the army was left at liberty to pursue the original object of the war, namely, the destruction of the Pindarees; and such was the activity and skilful combinations now displayed in the pursuit of these military banditti, that they were cir. cumvented on all sides, and in their various attempts to escape, they were intercepted by the different corps of the British army, and put to death by thousands. So wasted were they at last, and so discouraged by fatigue, hunger, and the sword, that most of their leaders were obliged to submit on the single condition, that their lives should be spared, and that they should receive a suitable maintenance in situations assigned to them by the British, at a distance from their former haunts. It was found a difficult task for the leaders to reconcile their licentious sol

diery to an arrangement, which deprived them of their arms, the implements of their trade; and it was not till Mr D. Ochterlony agreed to employ about 3000 of them as cavalry in the British service, that the quiet dispersion of these disorderly bands was at length effected.

Having so far accomplished the objects of the war in the destruction of these corps of military banditti, a different distribution of the troops now took place, in order to carry into effect the ulterior views of the AngloIndian government. The three different chiefs, namely, Holkar, Bajee Rao, Peshwa of Poonah, and Appa Saheb, Kajah of Nagpoor, who had taken the field against the British, had fallen under the irresistible weight of their power, and now lay at the mercy of their conquerors. Holkar, as already mentioned, was degraded in to an humble dependent of the British, and was besides stript of some portion of territory. With respect to the unfortunate Bajee Rao, it was resolved, that he should be deprived of his dominions, and that the sovereignty hitherto resident in his illustrious family should be extinguished for ever. Suttara, still the nominal capital of the Mahratta empire, with the district belonging to it, was to be erected into an independent sovereignty, and given to the family of that name, while all the other dominions of the Peshwa were to be taken under the administration of the British, and annexed to their already immense territories in India. Appa Saheb, Kajah of Nagpoor, under various restrictions and cessions of territory, was restored to his dominions. The territorial cessions of Holkar comprehended a country remarkably strong by nature, and filled with fortresses besides, and Arab colonies, from which serious opposition was to be expected; and it was

extremely desirable that these strongholds should be reduced, and that every obstacle to the pacification of the country should thus be removed. This duty was committed to Sir Thomas Hislop, who speedily accomplished the reduction of all the forts which were held by the different chiefs throughout this strong country. It was in the course of this service that he resorted to the dubious measure of executing the commander of the fort of Talner, for defending this strong-hold, contrary to the order of Holkar his sovereign. A fire had been opened against this fort from the British batteries, and it was at length resolved to force the gate of the place, and to storm it. The storming party had penetrated to the third gate, when they were met by the governor, who proffered his surrender. The third and fourth gates were then opened, and they were proceeding to the fifth, when the garrison appeared mutinous, and demanded a parley. The gate was, however, finally opened, and a small party of officers and soldiers having entered, they were attacked by the Arab garrison, when Major Gordon and Captain M'Gregor were immediately killed. Lieutenant-Colonel Murray was also cut down and disabled, with two other officers, besides several soldiers who were killed. In the end, however, the Arabs were driven back; the place was carried, and the garrison, amounting to 700 men, were put to the sword by the infuriated troops. It did not appear, however, from the minutes of the court-martial, that the commander was accessory to this treachery of the garrison, and he was therefore hanged, on the ground of his having rebelled against his own sovereign, for whose honour and dignity he was at the time, from a mistaken sense of honour, hazarding his life. The subsequent and regular surrender