3. [The "Amistad" and "Creole" Cases]
On June 28, 1839, a schooner, the Amistad, sailed from Havana bound for Guanaja in the vicinity of Puerto Principe. She was under the command of her owner, Don Ramon Ferrer, was laden with merchandise, and had on board fifty-three Negroes, forty-nine of whom supposedly belonged to a Spaniard, Don Jose Ruiz, the other four belonging to Don Pedro Montes. During the night of June 30 the slaves, under the lead of one of their number named Cinque, rose upon the crew, killed the captain, a slave of his, and two sailors, and while they permitted most of the crew to escape, they took into close custody the two owners, Ruiz and Montes. Montes, who had some knowledge of nautical affairs, was ordered to steer the vessel back to Africa. So he did by day, when the Negroes would watch him, but at night he tried to make his way to some land nearer at hand. Other vessels passed from time to time, and from these the Negroes bought provisions, but Montes and Ruiz were so closely watched that they could not make known their plight. At length, on August 26, the schooner reached Long Island Sound, where it was detained by the American brig-of-war Washington, in command of Captain Gedney, who secured the Negroes and took them to New London, Conn. It took a year and a half to dispose of the issue thus raised. The case attracted the greatest amount of attention, led to international complications, and was not really disposed of until a former President had exhaustively argued the case for the Negroes before the Supreme Court of the United States.
In a letter of September 6, 1839, to John Forsyth, the American Secretary of State, Calderon, the Spanish minister, formally made four demands: 1. That the Amistad be immediately delivered up to her owner, together with every article on board at the time of her capture; 2. That it be declared that no tribunal in the United States had the right to institute proceedings against, or to impose penalties upon, the subjects of Spain, for crimes committed on board a Spanish vessel, and in the waters of Spanish territory; 3. That the Negroes be conveyed to Havana or otherwise placed at the disposal of the representatives of Spain; and 4. That if, in consequence of the intervention of the authorities in Connecticut, there should be any delay in the desired delivery of the vessel and the slaves, the owners both of the latter and of the former be indemnified for the injury that might accrue to them. In support of his demands Calderon invoked "the law of nations, the stipulations of existing treaties, and those good feelings so necessary in the maintenance of the friendly relations that subsist between the two countries, and are so interesting to both." Forsyth asked for any papers bearing on the question, and Calderon replied that he had none except "the declaration on oath of Montes and Ruiz."
Meanwhile the abolitionists were insisting that protection had not been afforded the African strangers cast on American soil and that in no case did the executive arm of the Government have any authority to interfere with the regular administration of justice. "These Africans," it was said, "are detained in jail, under process of the United States courts, in a free state, after it has been decided by the District Judge, on sufficient proof, that they are recently from Africa, were never the lawful slaves of Ruiz and Montes," and "when it is clear as noonday that there is no law or treaty stipulation that requires the further detention of these Africans or their delivery to Spain or its subjects."
Writing on October 24 to the Spanish representative with reference to the arrest of Ruiz and Montes, Forsyth informed him that the two Spanish subjects had been arrested on process issuing from the superior court of the city of New York upon affidavits of certain men, natives of Africa, "for the purpose of securing their appearance before the proper tribunal, to answer for wrongs alleged to have been inflicted by them upon the persons of said Africans," that, consequently, the occurrence constituted simply a "case of resort by individuals against others to the judicial courts of the country, which are equally open to all without distinction," and that the agency of the Government to obtain the release of Messrs. Ruiz and Montes could not be afforded in the manner requested. Further pressure was brought to bear by the Spanish representative, however, and there was cited the case of Abraham Wendell, captain of the brig Franklin, who was prosecuted at first by Spanish officials for maltreatment of his mate, but with reference to whom documents were afterwards sent from Havana to America. Much more correspondence followed, and Felix Grundy, of Tennessee, Attorney General of the United States, at length muddled everything by the following opinion: "These Negroes deny that they are slaves; if they should be delivered to the claimants, no opportunity may be afforded for the assertion of their right to freedom. For these reasons, it seems to me that a delivery to the Spanish minister is the only safe course for this Government to pursue." The fallacy of all this was shown in a letter dated November 18, 1839, from B.F. Butler, United States District Attorney in New York, to Aaron Vail, acting Secretary of State. Said Butler: "It does not appear to me that any question has yet arisen under the treaty with Spain; because, although it is an admitted principle, that neither the courts of this state, nor those of the United States, can take jurisdiction of criminal offenses committed by foreigners within the territory of a foreign state, yet it is equally settled in this country, that our courts will take cognizance of civil actions between foreigners transiently within our jurisdiction, founded upon contracts or other transactions made or had in a foreign state." Southern influence was strong, however, and a few weeks afterwards an order was given from the Department of State to have a vessel anchor off New Haven, Conn., January 10, 1840, to receive the Negroes from the United States marshal and take them to Cuba; and on January 7 the President, Van Buren, issued the necessary warrant.
The rights of humanity, however, were not to be handled in this summary fashion. The executive order was stayed, and the case went further on its progress to the highest tribunal in the land. Meanwhile the anti-slavery people were teaching the Africans the rudiments of English in order that they might be better able to tell their own story. From the first a committee had been appointed to look out for their interests and while they were awaiting the final decision in their case they cultivated a garden of fifteen acres.
The appearance of John Quincy Adams in behalf of these Negroes before the Supreme Court of the United States February 24 and March 1, 1841, is in every way one of the most beautiful acts in American history. In the fullness of years, with his own administration as President twelve years behind him, the "Old Man Eloquent" came once more to the tribunal that he knew so well to make a last plea for the needy and oppressed. To the task he brought all his talents—his profound knowledge of law, his unrivaled experience, and his impressive personality; and his argument covers 135 octavo pages. He gave an extended analysis of the demand of the Spanish minister, who asked the President to do what he simply had no constitutional right to do. "The President," said Adams, "has no power to arrest either citizens or foreigners. But even that power is almost insignificant compared with that of sending men beyond seas to deliver them up to a foreign government." The Secretary of State had "degraded the country, in the face of the whole civilized world, not only by allowing these demands to remain unanswered, but by proceeding, throughout the whole transaction, as if the Executive were earnestly desirous to comply with every one of the demands." The Spanish minister had naturally insisted in his demands because he had not been properly met at first. The slave-trade was illegal by international agreement, and the only thing to do under the circumstances was to release the Negroes. Adams closed his plea with a magnificent review of his career and of the labors of the distinguished jurists he had known in the court for nearly forty years, and be it recorded wherever the name of Justice is spoken, he won his case.
Lewis Tappan now accompanied the Africans on a tour through the states to raise money for their passage home. The first meeting was in Boston. Several members of the company interested the audience by their readings from the New Testament or by their descriptions of their own country and of the horrors of the voyage. Cinque gave the impression of great dignity and of extraordinary ability; and Kali, a boy only eleven years of age, also attracted unusual attention. Near the close of 1841, accompanied by five missionaries and teachers, the Africans set sail from New York, to make their way first to Sierra Leone and then to their own homes as well as they could.
While this whole incident of the Amistad was still engaging the interest of the public, there occurred another that also occasioned international friction and even more prolonged debate between the slavery and anti-slavery forces. On October 25, 1841, the brig Creole, Captain Ensor, of Richmond, Va., sailed from Richmond and on October 27 from Hampton Roads, with a cargo of tobacco and one hundred and thirty slaves bound for New Orleans. On the vessel also, aside from the crew, were the captain's wife and child, and three or four passengers, who were chiefly in charge of the slaves, one man, John R. Hewell, being directly in charge of those belonging to an owner named McCargo. About 9.30 on the night of Sunday, November 7, while out at sea, nineteen of the slaves rose, cowed the others, wounded the captain, and generally took command of the vessel. Madison Washington began the uprising by an attack on Gifford, the first mate, and Ben Blacksmith, one of the most aggressive of his assistants, killed Hewell. The insurgents seized the arms of the vessel, permitted no conversation between members of the crew except in their hearing, demanded and obtained the manifests of slaves, and threatened that if they were not taken to Abaco or some other British port they would throw the officers and crew overboard. The Creole reached Nassau, New Providence, on Tuesday, November 9, and the arrival of the vessel at once occasioned intense excitement. Gifford went ashore and reported the matter, and the American consul, John F. Bacon, contended to the English authorities that the slaves on board the brig were as much a part of the cargo as the tobacco and entitled to the same protection from loss to the owners. The governor, Sir Francis Cockburn, however, was uncertain whether to interfere in the business at all. He liberated those slaves who were not concerned in the uprising, spoke of all of the slaves as "passengers," and guaranteed to the nineteen who were shown by an investigation to have been connected with the uprising all the rights of prisoners called before an English court. He told them further that the British Government would be communicated with before their case was finally passed upon, that if they wished copies of the informations these would be furnished them, and that they were privileged to have witnesses examined in refutation of the charges against them. From time to time Negroes who were natives of the island crowded about the brig in small boats and intimidated the American crew, but when on the morning of November 12 the Attorney General questioned them as to their intentions they replied with transparent good humor that they intended no violence and had assembled only for the purpose of conveying to shore such of the persons on the Creole as might be permitted to leave and might need their assistance. The Attorney General required, however, that they throw overboard a dozen stout cudgels that they had. Here the whole case really rested. Daniel Webster as Secretary of State aroused the anti-slavery element by making a strong demand for the return of the slaves, basing his argument on the sacredness of vessels flying the American flag; but the English authorities at Nassau never returned any of them. On March 21, 1842, Joshua R. Giddings, untiring defender of the rights of the Negro, offered in the House of Representatives resolutions to the effect that slavery could exist only by positive law of the different states; that the states had delegated no control over slavery to the Federal Government, which alone had jurisdiction on the high seas, and that, therefore, slaves on the high seas became free and the coastwise trade was unconstitutional. The House, strongly pro-Southern, replied with a vote of censure and Giddings resigned, but he was immediately reëlected by his Ohio constituency.
Footnote 105: [(return)]
Official Report, 19.