contained; and they all are reasons applicable to a Prince without dominions, without Courts, without a country; and to a foreign Prince, in regard to English property and English subjects. Now, then, let us see how these men stand. Under the 8th section, those men who were not citizens of the United States, are, of course, protected by a commission from a Government _de facto_. Their taking was not _animo furandi_, because there was a commission. The very enactment of the statute of William III. was upon the basis that it was not piracy where there was a commission, even of this questionable sort. I say, then, in my third point, that if the facts are found as supposed in the preceding point, and if it also appears that the commission from the Confederated States, or the President thereof, had been issued for the Savannah, and that the capture was made under color thereof, then, as to the prisoners shown not to be citizens of the United States, the taking of the Joseph was not piratical under the eighth section of the Act of 1790,--_first_, because it was under color of authority; nor, _second_, was it piratical under the ninth section, because that only applies to citizens of the United States; and the prisoners, Del Carno, &c., must be acquitted under the ninth as well as under the eighth section. But now we come to the American citizens who took that commission, and we are to see with some accuracy how the case stands as to them,--which involves two questions: One is, what kind of "other person" is embraced in that law? And the other is, whether this indictment is supported as under a commission from any _person_ whatever? Let me call your attention to the form of the indictment in this last count of the declaration. They all run in this way: that these persons, "being citizens, did, _on pretence of authority from a person, to wit, one Jefferson Davis_," &c. That is all that is said as to the pretence. Now there is no lack of skill in this indictment. The pleader under this indictment was surrounded with difficulties very grave indeed. He had the commission. If he had described it as a commission from certain foreign States, namely, South Carolina, Georgia, &c., the Government would have recognized the existence of those States in the most formal manner and by action of the most formal kind. If he said "Jefferson Davis, President of certain Confederate States," that would be simply that the pretence of authority was a pretence of authority from those States, and the same consequence would result. Well, what could he do? The only way in which he could make this stand at all was by saying that it is an authority from Jefferson Davis, as an individual. That is the meaning of this allegation.