"Soon after the abdication of James II., an international question of very great importance arose, namely, what character should be ascribed to privateers commissioned by the monarch, who had abdicated, to make war against the adherents of William III., or rather against the English, while under his rule. The question, in fact, involved a discussion of the general principle, whether a deposed sovereign, claiming to be sovereign _de jure_, might lawfully commission privateers against the subjects and adherents of the sovereign _de facto_ on the throne; or whether such privateers were not to be considered as pirates, inasmuch as they were sailing _animo furandi et depraedundi_, without any _national_ character. The question, it should be observed, did not arise in its full breadth and importance _until James II. had been expelled from Ireland as well as England, until, in fact, he was a sovereign, claiming to be such de jure_, BUT CONFESSEDLY WITHOUT TERRITORY. It appears that James, after he was in this condition, continued to issue letters of marque to his followers. The Privy Council of William III. desired to hear civilians upon the point of the piratical character of such privateers. The arguments on both sides are contained in a curious and rather rare pamphlet, published by one of the counsel (Dr. Tindal) for King William, in the years 1693-4. The principal arguments for the piratical character of the privateers appear to have been-- "That they who acted under such commission may be dealt with as if they had acted under their own authority or the authority of any private person, and therefore might be treated as pirates. That if such a titular Prince might grant commissions to seize the ships and goods of all or most trading nations, he might derive a considerable revenue as a chief of such freebooters, and that it would be madness in nations not to use the utmost rigor of the law against such vessels. "That the reason of the thing which pronounced that robbers and pirates, when they formed themselves into a civil society, became just enemies, pronounced also that A KING WITHOUT TERRITORY, without power of protecting the innocent or punishing the guilty, or in any way of administering justice, dwindled into a pirate if he issued commissions to seize the goods and ships of nations; and that they who took commissions from him must be held by legal inference to have associated _sceleris causâ_, and could not be considered as members of a civil society."