The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1839-09-28
THE CASE OF THE AMIsTAD.

sence OF a large number Of persons. The Court
opened at O'clock and even before this hour The
court room was ihronged to OVERLOOKING. more
interested audience, judging from the earnest atten
ion OF those present, assembled together.
No one, the judges accepted, knew what the deci-
sion was TO be before the Court opened
DECISION OF JUDGE THOMPSON.
On the opening OF the Circuit Court Monday,
September 23d, Judge Thompson gave his decision
sci 10 have the Africans discharged under The writ
OF habeas corpus-and denied 0e motion. He said
the question before the Court was simply as 10 the
jurisdiction Of the District Cour over this subject
matter He regretted that the case had not been
held up Tor further consideration, and that he had
so little opportunity TO examine the various impor-
tant questions that are involved In A. with that tho
roughness and deliberation that were desirable He
regretted this the the case Is very peculiar
and complicated one. 1t was one also difficult 10
be understood by the public. He could not be in
sensible 10 the fact that the feelings of the commun
~ were deeply involved in The question and he fear
ed there might be Misrepresentation Of the real ques
tons to be disposed Of by the Court II Is possible
be said, that there may be some Misrepresentation.
lie would therefore have preferred that time should
have been allowed for him to give written opinion.
But the counsel have thought il advisable, and he
did not say Il was not excusable to call upon the
Court TO dispose Of the case now, and he was CON-
PEELED, though much against his wishes to dispose
OF il in the best way he could
The question 10 be decided noc is not as 10 tie ultimate
rights Of either Paybut it is whether the District
Court take cognizance of the subectm matter that
grows out Of this case In order to ascertain this
we must recur 10 the laws Of the United States The
case has been placed before the Court on the abstract
right OF holding human beings in bondage or on the
general question Of slavery The Court is not
called upon here TO determine this abstract question.
Il Is sufficient TO say that the Constitution of the
United States, although the term slavery is moi used
and The laws Of the United States, do no, recognise
the right of one have the control OF the labor
OF another man. The laws n he nfrv fam
ed upon this principle They recognise this kind OF
right. Whatever private motives the Court may
have, or whatever may be their feelings on this sub
ec they are not to be brought into view in deciding
upon this question. They must give the same con
strction TO the laws OF the land, sitting in this State
as they would were they sitting in Virginia II is
the province and the duly Of the Court 10 determine
wha the laws are and not what II might be desira-
Bile they should be- My feelings, said Judge Thomp-
son. personally aDhorrent 10 the system of sla
very as those of any man here, but must on nv
oath, pronounce what the laws are on this subject
The true question then is the law and not as 10
any OF the questions involved in the case The sim.
pie question 10 determine is the right of the Dis
trct Court OF Connecticut take co2niZance of the
matter
Under the laws of the United States, all seizures
IN district are TO be taken notice Of in that district
where the seizure is made The important question
isalways as to the place Of seizure, andIhe question
always turns upon that If seizure is made within
the limits OF State, the jurisdiction Of The District
Court Is local. II it is made on The high seas, any
District Court may take cognizance of the matter
Where then was the seizure made in this case Z II
seems TO be agreed by the counsel on both sides that
the seizure was actually made in the district Of New
York. lfthat be the case this District Cour, has no
jurisdiction of It whatever. But il the seizure
IN fact made on the high seas this District Court has
jurisdiction. Judge t. said he had supposed first
that the seizure was in fact made in the district of
New York, but when he came TO examine the mat
ter he found It was not SO. Lieut.. Gedney, in HIS
hal tL. 4
survey within the State Of New York, but he does
not say that he actually discovered The schooner
Amistad within that district, and that he made the
seizure within the district of New York All the
evidence before the Court is what is set forth
in the libel. The vessel, II seems was taken off
Montauk Point. The grand jury, in their statement,
say il was mile distant from the shore II this be
correct il was seizure upon the high seas and there
fore the matter is rghtfuly before the Court for this
district.
In the absence OF absolute certainty on this point
the Court can endeavor TO ascertain from the best
evidence in their reach, by examining maps and
charts, the locality of the place; and after such an
examination, they are of opinion that the actual
place OF seizure does not appear 10 be within the u
risdetion of the District Court of New York, but
upon the high seas The admiralty Jurisdiction up
on the ocean extends 10 low water mark. Between
high and low water mark there is alternate juIiSdic-
lion between the admiralty and common law courts.
In deciding then that the seizure was made in the
judgment of the Court, upon the high seas il either
party is dissatisfied, the Court can institute inquiry
TO ascertain the exact place, but the more regular
course is for the party dissatisfied inerpose plea
to the jurisdiction of The Court and then the District
Court must institute an inquiry TO ascertain where
the seizure was made IL is not competent then for
this Court, at the present time TO say the District
Court has no jurisdiction in the case. Consequently
this Court cannot now pass upon the question as 10
the propriety-the matter belongs TO the District
Court Should either party be dissatisfied with the
decision ofthat Court, an appeal can be taken TO the
Circuit Court and afterwards to the Supreme Court
Of the United States Meantime the parties must
be put TO their pleas in The District Court in order
thai all the facts, &c may be put upon record.
II has been said this is question Of liberty and
therefore that this Court ought TO decide the in
summary and prompt manner But, in The judg-
ment of the Court this ought have influence in
the decisiun The situation OF The prisoners is such
that they must be taken care Of by somebody. They
did not come here voluntarily. Ii is not the case,
therefore, of persons coming here of their own ac-
cord, and being taken up by other persons against
theirwill. ii the District Court has jurisdiction Of
the schooner they have jursdctonof the persons of
these Africans and they are bound 10 provide neceS
saries for them. They can provide for them as well
as any other persons. The case seems 10 have been
argued the part of the prisoners II they ought
to be discharged II the Court has no jurisdiction
This Is no. So If il should be decided that the Dis.
rict Court here has no jurisdiction, they decide
also that the cause be submitted to the District Court
OF New York. The Court would in that case, send
vessel and cargo, and every thing appertaining to
that Court. The prisoners would not be discharged,
but sent also to the District Court Of New York. No
benefit would arise TO them in being removed from
this another district II is therefore matter ONO
consequence the prisoners whether the question is
tried here or in the district Of New York
II has been said that the subsequent proceedings in
filing these libels and claims here we're without au-
thority But il the case is within the Jurisdiction Of
the District Court, other libes could be filed Il is
true that ii the original bills have been fled inorder
TO bring the matter within The jurisdiction vf this
Court, The proceedings may be irregular Ifthere is
any irregulary, 1t can be corrected b. filing new
libe-the case being in the possession of the Dis
trct Court however il is bound to receive claims Of
any body. This Court cannot decide whether these
Spaniards have right 10 these persons or whether
they should be put in the possession Of the President
OF the United States. These questions are nov re-