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

this IL The first instance where wr OF habeas cor
pus has been applied tor Il has never been made
question whether they were instantly free ON being
brought into The United States. The case OF The
| Antelope Is directly 10 point. The Spanish and
| Portuguese consuls claimed these subjects as pro-
perty-ihe Court said they must show their title.
| There may be an impression here that because
slavery Is not tolerated Connecticut the right of
these Spaniards should not be Investigated. The
Court, however must be governed by the laws ofihe
UniIed States and not by the laws OF The Stale Of
Connecticut Our form Of government recognised
the right 10 import slaves mp 10 the year loOc y IS
true the Constitution does not use that language but
L recognises that right up to certain period and
declares that till then Il lawful impoItatlon-
The Constitution also provides for the recovery oil
persons that may escape from one State into anoher
where service Is due. II goes beyond this and
interdics The States from passing laws thai oppose
claimants from taking fugitive persons in the free
States. Should any State pass such laws they would
be absolutely void. We must look al things as they
are. The Court feel bound therefore, to say that
there Is no ground upon which they can entertain
the motion under the writ OF hateaseoTpH
They fear that some misapprehenson exists in the
public mind as 10 the effect and ground on which the
case has been disposed Of by The grand jury, under
the directions of the Court. The question now dis
posed of has mol been affected by what previously
took place. The only matter settled previously was,
mat there had been no criminal offence cognizable
by the Courts OF the United States 1.-THE offence of
murder has been committed on board foreign yes
this Is not an offence against the United STATES Il
Is an offence against the laws OF the country 10 which
the vessel belonged The Courts Of the United Ststes
have, IN such cases, no jurisdiction; but 1.-THE offence
be against the laws Of nations this Court would have
Jurisdiction. murder committed, as 10 the case
oil The captain Of the Amistad Is not crime against
the laws OF nalio1s connected II is with the slave
trade tEh
The Court said that, as they perceived there we're
noe-takers present, be hoped they would be careful
10 make true representation of the decision. The
Court do not undertake 10 say that these Africans
have no rightto their freedom but leave thai matter
In litigation in the District Court subject TO appeal
and, for reasons assigned, deny this n,6tion.
One OF the counsel Tor the prisoners then asked the
ConrI II they meant 10 express the opinion that a
foreigner coming here with slave can call upon The
oniteu Staies Courts TO enfore the claim of the TO-
reigner 10 The slave2 Judge Thompson, in reply,
SAID ne did not wish TO decide now upon The alb
stract question As Judge, he did not feel called
sine die. -
The District Court was opened. The Judge said
he should direct that the United States Aiiorneg
should repair 10 Montauk Point, in the revenue cut
ter, with gentleman on the other side to inveSt-
gate the facts ascertain where The seizure was ac-
tually made &C.; that the Court would be adjourned
10 meet in Hartford on the third Tuesday in Novem-
Der next; and thai, meantime, IL would be the duty
OF the marshal to see that the prisoners were COM
foraby situated and provided with clothes suited
the season that they had sufficient food medical at
tendance, &c. The Court would il is presumed, al
low the prisoners To be discharged on giving bail
but, as it must be on appraisement, their counsel
would not TO il. The prisoners will proba-
bly, be remanded 10 the jail in New Haven.