Morning herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1837-1840, 1839-09-23

Captain Of the Amistad. He was board when
the little girls were brought on board. They came
board in broad daylight. They were none Of them
chained--they were all free. They might have been
board the vessel fourth hour before the girls
came-not more They were in the vessel twenty
four hours before she sailed. They went below or
| stayed ON deck, at full liberty, and just as they
pleased. They were never tied The Captain al
were Spanish and Yankee men Of war in the port,
and English too. There were many vessels there in
pursuit OF slavers. The Amistad sailed at o'clock
in the afternoon. The Captain had owned him from
very small boy-had always treated him well and
his mistress too.
Cross examined The slaves had been at Havana
half a month. They came in vessel called Laf0rca
she was under the Portuguese dag. They might all
have come TO ,ether-he did not KIN ow. They could
not speak Spanish. The Amistad sailed at 4oclock
afternoon The slaves were on board one day before
she sailed She could not sail before on account Of
the papers She lay about musket shot from the
shore. The Captain paid no at ention the English
men of war. There was an awning spread TO keep
of the sun. He don't know the Captain Of the
Laforca. Don't know where the slaves were kept,
but supposes along the coast. The Amistad had not
before been employed in transporting slaves. She
had made voyage to Havana with sugar. Don't
know that the cook ever told the slaves that they
were to be killed and eaten. Never said heard
Question by Mr.. IngersoH-I don't know that the
slaves came from Africa, only as they told me
Mr. Hungerford followed in very able and inge-
NOUS argument in behalf Of the Spanish claimants He
opposite counsel; and showed that property in hu-
man beings had been c"gnised at different periods,
in all countries. He contended that it was
soHabe and ungenerous to endeavor to excite pre-
JUDGE against these Spanish shareholders, when sla
very was not .ly allowed but prot :cted by our own
laws He said the insnuatious that Montez was
SLAYER, or abettor Of the savers, was unsupport
ed by shadow of proof. That he bought the cniid-
rem, not Of SLAYER, but Of tobac const in Havana,
where such purchases were sane toned by the law
MIR. Staples replied in few words, and the court
nd lnnrn mad thn nirkr
Sept. 81, Saturday Moraing.
Judge Thompson deli cred the opinion al the court
on the habeas corpus prayed out for the Liberation of
the Africa chlirfu. The court is not now prepar-
ed to dispose OF case finally. Therefore any OBJ.
servations that may be made, ought not to HAYES
bearing on the main question 1t is a case of very
great difficulty. and the court feels much embarrass
ed from the aspect in which It is now presented =
The other Africans discharged from any crimi-
nal accusation; and it is question as TO what dispo
stion is to be made Of them, well rs to the chill
dren sought to be released on the habeas corpus
The embarrassment reaches all, and the discussion
must embrace the whole case in general and
tended point OF view. As the children are brought
here on habeas corpus, the court has ccgnzance,
except on the ground that they illegally held by
the District Court; for if they rightfully held,
and by authority of law, this court has right to
take them out OF the possession OF that court II the
District court has Jurisdiction in the case it be
litigat there and great injustice might be done by
disposing Of II in this summary way. Ii either party
is dissatisfied with the decision al the District court
that party can appeal IN .ns first piae to this court
States. In the judgment Of the court, this case is
presented as question Of jurisdiction, and however
abhorrent It may be 10 our feelings, however desra
BILE that every human being should be set az liberty,
we cannot be governed by our feelings, but only by
the law IL has been argued here the gene raj merits
oil the question: that court entertain
over human beings as property. Although taat pro
position is imposing cannot shut eyes TO the
fact, that slavery has been recognized by foreign
powers, AND by our own highest judicial tribunals
That question las opened by the supreme court in
the case OF the Antelope. The Spanish decree,
prohibi ing slavery, before the court; but, not
withstanding, the court did entertain jurisdiction
True, the supreme court was divided on the question:
whether the slaves should be restored, but not To
the right Ia entertain the inquiry 10 property in
human beings. The question was upon whom, the bur-
den OF proof rested The court put il the ground
that you must show property The right ofproperty
settled and this court considers il to inquiry
in this case.
In the case Of the Antelope here was no question
but that the vessel had been properly put into the
possession Of the district court. The had the
property and they had right Ia inquire whose pro-
perry il was. When the law recognises human be-
inss as property. it will not do to say is not open
to inquiry.
The question is, is the property rightfully in pos
session Of the district court III Il is case coming
at all within the spirit oe our laws to the African
slave trade, whatever my own views may be as to
the ultimate inquiry, il be settled in the ord-
nary way IN the prosecution Of suit, and net dis
posed Of in this summary way on q preliminary in
Whether these Spaniards, being citizens Of a
country where the slave trade 10 prohibited, be
allowed TO come into courts to claim these men
as property, when by the laws Of their country
they are free, is acase tn be decided upon its merits
and Is not TO be disposed Of application for
habeas corpus.
The only difficulty in my view is, to determine
whether this property Is rightfully possession Of
the district court IL the court has jurisdiction,
then these men held without authority and must
be discharged.
Although the question was accidently tomched up
on m the arguments yesterday the is not pre-
pared To decide IT, We would therefore request the
counsel to furnish another argument that specific
question
Judge Thompson stated that the counsel could
have time sufficient to prepare their arguments.
Mr.. lngersoll suggested whether il would not be
better Tor the counsel to prepare their arguments in
wri ing, with the authorities to support them, and
send them to the court in order to give time for
ture deliberstion.
s.Judgs T. This would be more satisfactory 10 the
court.
Mr.. Sfdpies This arrangement would be agreeable
TO bat there IL strong sensation in the public
mind this subject, and IL Is desirable TO have the
question settled Immediately, if possible.
Judge H. The court Is sorry 10 hear that there 10
any srciemsnf in relation TO this matter II IL ques-
ton to be decided, not by popular feeling but by the
authority Of the law.
The counsel agreed q inform the court in the after
what course they would be ready to adopt.
o'clock, r. M.
Ihave just learned that Mr.. Staples, after