Why no media on loot from 1812 US Capitol raid

cnews.canoe.ca...

www.canada.com...


These stories are about the discussions ongoing which are trying to decide what to do about the possible discovery of the wreck of the HMS Fantome. Inside her hull may lie artifacts looted from Washington DC in 1812 when British invaders from Canada set the Whitehouse on fire and looted the US capital. Some claim that there may be items worth up to $1 Billion inside. The decision to be made is as to who should salvage it, the UK?, Canada, the US? And then, if there is anything of historical value found, who gets it?
When I read the story I wondered why I had not heard more about it in the US media? It seems that it is something that should be of fairly significant import.
So, is there a conspiracy of silence? Or could it be that the US is a little shy about the whole incident? I mean, who likes to talk about the time they got drubbed. In retaliation, they did come up to Canada and burn Toronto, so they did get some vengeance.


[edit on 9/30/2006 by BlackGuardXIII]

If it has HMS in front of it, then it is a british warship and under unternational law it and its contents remain the property of the Uk government.

Originally posted by paperplane_uk
If it has HMS in front of it, then it is a british warship and under unternational law it and its contents remain the property of the Uk government.

Absolutely right, Paperplane.
On a side note I wonder if they looted Madison's cutlery when they burnt the White House?

There is talk of the "REAL 13TH AMMENDMANT" to the American Constitution that bars anyone that holds Gov't office to hold a title of Nobility. All lawyers are considered to be "esquires" one rank below Knight in service to the "Crown". If a real copy of this ammendment were to surface, no lawyers could hold Gov't office, any laws that were introduced including the Federal Reserve Act could be considered unlawfull and would null and void a large number of laws. This is the real reason British loyalists/Future Canadians burnt down the Whitehouse, always to protect the "crown".
google it some time it's very interesting.

Maybe there is an original copy on that ship!

Originally posted by BattleofBatoche
This is the real reason British loyalists/Future Canadians burnt down the Whitehouse, always to protect the "crown".
google it some time it's very interesting.

Maybe there is an original copy on that ship!

They were British soldiers, not Loyalists or Canadians! See the order of battle at the bottom of this page - en.wikipedia.org...
And the chances of anything made of paper surviving inside a wreck after all that time in all that water is minimal.

Originally posted by paperplane_uk
If it has HMS in front of it, then it is a british warship and under unternational law it and its contents remain the property of the Uk government.

Good point! I only have one question though. This ship sank during a war. It had just been reportedly filled with stolen treasure from it's enemy. . .

Shouldn't stolen items be returned to their rightful owner sometime in the future to show honor, and help keep the peace? I have to say that history does show ongoing battles all over the world to return such items. All the way back to the Greeks.

What about the private salvage contractors? Shouldn't people willing to risk their own wealth to find these items be compensated justifiably? Check the first web site below and you'll find they got "NO REWARD AT ALL" from a US court of appeals!

Here's a list of sites I found that are right along these lines. It seems that the sovereignty of the vessels have been upheld, but that stolen treasure during wartime still remains quite a fight/debate all over the globe.

www.admiraltylawguide.com...

home.att.net...

www.artsjournal.com...

138.25.65.50...

Thanx for the comment. It made me find all this stuff out! 2PacSade-

Originally posted by paperplane_uk
If it has HMS in front of it, then it is a british warship and under unternational law it and its contents remain the property of the Uk government.

Sure, I can accept that. But, from what I have read the UK still legally holds the rights to the lands that the US expropriated and declared independent contrary to the law. The formation of a new nation is one thing, but they did more when they claimed lands that were legally deeded to the Crown. I don't have the actual text handy, but it is called the 'The Virginia Land Act' or something like that and states that the crown owns the land. The US could be said to be occupying land that is property of the UK too. But does that mean anything? Doubtful.
PS, thanks all for posting here.
If any news of specific items comes up, please let us know.

Originally posted by BattleofBatoche
There is talk of the "REAL 13TH AMMENDMANT" to the American Constitution that bars anyone that holds Gov't office to hold a title of Nobility.

Maybe there is an original copy on that ship!

The ship ran aground in 1814 so that would be a moot point.

the 13th amendment was not ratified until 1865. It is the final signed version that counts.


Source

[edit on 10/15/2006 by shots]