The voice of freedom. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1839-1848, 1839-12-07

the demand that these individuals should be treat
ed not as persons, having rights, but as property,
as the mere chattes of other persons. The Ii
belant even alleges their value in money to be
$4,000, and Tor the service rendered, not to hu-
manity, in saving so many lives of his fellow men,
but 10 the Spanish gentlemen" in saving their
property, he asks this court to go into an inquiry
to ascertain their value, and to pursue the usual
measures of an Admiralty Court in regard TO prop
erty saved from the perils Of the seas And now
he denies the right of these individuals to appear
in court and deny that they are the property he
alleges them to be- Unless they are property,
Lieut.. Gedney has no foundation for his libel, and
this court no foundation for proceeding in regard
to them, for no process is against them in this
court as persons.
The constitution and laws of the United States
have not vested this court to pass decree in this
case against these persons in any other capacity
except as property. IT, them the court award sal
wage 10 Lieut.. Gedney, per centage on all the
property claimed and if Ruiz and Montez claim
these persons as property, and they are not allow
ed to come in and prove that they are persons
and not property and therefore not sub ect pro-
cess that lies only against property, it is plain
that their dearest rights are 10 be sacrificed with
out hearing.
This court will remember that we have once
applied TO your honor, sitting in another court on
a writ of habeas corpus and we wished then for
an opportunity TO make proof that these persons
were entitled 10 be Free but the Circuit Court said
that the whole question was regularly before the
District Court where we could be heard in full.
But now the doctrine of the gentleman is, that we
are not to be heard in this court. We could not
be heard under the good old writ that was made
for the very purpose Of guarding the rights of men;
and now if we are to be debarreda hearing in this
court, will be rendered impossible for these per-
sons to obtain redress in any court whatsoever.
Surely, the gentleman will not press his objection.
And how can the gentleman say he does not
ask the court to sell these persons? He asks the
court TO seize all the property. The persons |
represent are claimed 20 be part of the property.
And then he asks this court of Admiralty TO pro-
coed in the usual manner, which is 10 order the
whole property TO be sold, and the proceeds to be
divided according TO the decree. If the court
decide these persons to be property, they must be
treated by the court as property and nothing but
property.
And now we ask the court to look at this ques-
ton of jurisdiction, and determine at the outset
whether the constitution and the laws have given
any authority TO treat these persons as property
We call the attention of the court to the obvious
difference contemplated by the constitution, be.
tween the rights of American citizens who hold
slaves, and foreigners. These individuals for
whom appear, stand before this court, on the face
of the proceedings, just as an Englishman or a
Spaniaru would stand, who was claimed as prop
erty by an Algerne STAKEHOLDER.
Isham. That | shall not deny.
After some remarks by Isham in reply, and
few suggestions of the District Attorney, the
Judge decided that the plea should be received
at the same time, that upon the trial of
the plea of jurisdiction, the parties would not be
permitted to so into the general merits of the
case, but that the evidence must be confined TO
the simple question. whether the seizure was made
within the district of New York. or Of Connecticut
The remainder o! the day was consumed in the
examination Of witnesses upon this point.
Wednesday, November 20.
The court held its session hiSmorning in the
City Court Room. In consequence Of the abb
sence of material witness on the part of the AT
ricans, the Interpreter who is detained by sickness
at New Haven and 10 accommodate Messrs. lsh-
am and Branerd, counsel for the libelants
whose engagements rendered it impossible for
them to remain in the city after Thursday the
Court decided to arrest the proceedings in their
present stage, and ad journ the whole matter rs it
now stands, to the 9TH of January, 1910, when its
session will be holden at New Haven.
In the afternoon the Judge held session at
his chamber in the City Hotel, for the purpose of
receiving the testimony of DR.. Madden which
was declared by Messrs. Staples and Baldwin to
be material 10 their cause, as the Doctor was
about to sail Immediately for Europe, This testi-
mony was taken in writing, reserving all ques-
lion as TO the admissibity of the whole, or any
part Of it, for determination hereafter. The cross
examination was conducted by Hollabird, United
States District Attorney, acting for the govern t
nent. After the testimony given in, DR.. NJ.
requested of the clerk copy of the testimony, '
hat he might show to his government what he
had done and for no other purpose. The clerk t
assented, and the scrivener commenced copying, c
when the judge interposed, and said that it was r-
'egulart give copies Of testimony taken in this C
manner, before even its admissibility was deter '
mined. In consequence of this order, measures
we're Immediately taken to prepare, from the Doc t
or's memoranda, and the notes of reporter, as c
perfect transcript as possible of the whole tes-
nony. And then, as one of the daily papers of
his city had obtained and published what profess
led to be an abstract of the testimony, land which,
t is believed, were furnished by an officer Of a
he court as no other persons likely to furnish ii Il
we're presently which abstract presented quit an n
Inadequate view of the testimony, it seemed plain il