consider that
"le bâtiment qui détruit pour détruire, par méchanceté gratuite ou par theorie anarchiste, constitue un pirate tout comme celui qui agit dans un esprit, laoratif“.
Other jurists on the other hand, (24) moatly continuental,
consider that the intention to derive pecuniary profit is
indispensable. Thus, while nearly all writers are
agreed that there must be an intention to proceed against
the vessel, they are not agreed as to whather, in order to
constitute piracy, the object must be gain, or whether some
other motive will suffice. fhatever the true theoretical
answer to this question may be, it is in the opinion of
the writers desirable that any legislation to be passed
should be confined to cases where pecuniary gain is the object.
Such cases in any event form the vast majority of those in
which the question of piracy arises. The cus-8 in which
aots of unauthorised violence are directed against a vessel
in time of peace, or a particular person on board her, for
other reasons than gain are extremely rare, and in nearly all
of them another essential ingredient of piracy jure gentium,
mentioned by nearly all writers, is absent, namely the
requirement that the pirate's hand should be directed
indiscriminately against the world in general or that at any
rate the circumstances should be auch that this can fairly
be presumed. As bernard has said in his work on "The
Neutrality of Great Britain during the American Civil
ar" (p.118-119).
24.
See list in Fauchille, ibid.
"The
79