The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1841-03-23

territories who have been guilty of offences against
the laws Of Spain. They do that the seizure
and bringing the vessel and cargo and negroes into
port by Lieut. Gedney for the purpose of adjudication
Is tortous act. They SIMPLY conGne themselves "a
the right Of tie Spanish claimants to the restitution Of
the property, upon the facts asserted in their respec
i tive allegations
In the next place, the parties before the Court on
the other side as appellees are Lieut. Gedney on his
libel for salvage, and the negroes Cinquez anu DINERS
asserting themselves in their answer not to be slaves
but free native Africans kidnapped in their own coun-
try, and illegally transported BY force from .na' 'o'
| try, and now entitled 10 maintain their freedom.
No question has been here made as 10 me PioPsh'a
ry interest in the vessel and cargo ~ 10 aumeu 'Iss
they belong TO Spanish subjects, and they QUIZ. ~
restored The only point on TINS hean ~ or
restoration ought 10 he upon the payment OF sasagco
moi The main controversy 10, whether these negfocs
are the property OF Ruiz and Montez ana ougn. 70
delivered up and this, accordingly we sna' r's' ~
Igs Thai the Court are bound TO deliver them
m according 10 the treaty OF IT'D with spain which
has ia this particular been continued IN iu force
the treaty Of 1919 ratified in 1921. The sixth article
of that treaty seems to have had principally IN view
where the property of the subjects of either State
had been taken possession OF within the territorial Ju
risdicon of the other, during war The eighth arti
Gle provides for where the shipping OF the inhab
tants of either State forced, through stress oil
weather, pursuit of pirates enemies any other ur
gent necessity seek shelter in the ports the other
There may we'll be doubt entertained whether
the present case in its actual circumstances falls with
in the purview OF this article. But il does not seem
necessary for hereafter stated absolutely TO de-
eide it. The 9th article provides That all ships and
merchandise, of what nature soevcr, which shall be
rescued out OF the hands of any pirates or robbers on
the high seas shall be brought into some port OF either
State and shall be delivered TO the custody OF the ON
OF the port in order be taken care OF and rcsto
red entire to the proprietor, soon as due and SUIT
fcien proof shall be made concerning the property
thereof" This is the article on which the main rei-
placed behalf Of the United States for the
restitution of these negroes. To bring the case within
the article il is essential TO establish, First. That
these negroes andsr all the circumstances ni wthn
the description merchandise the OF the trea-
~: Secondly, That there has been rescue OF them
the high out Of the hands of pirates and rob
beIs which, in the present case only be by show
ing that they themselves pirates and robbers and
Thirdly. That Rus and MonteI the asserted pro.
petors, the true propretors and have established
their title by competent proofs Ii these negroes were
at the time lawfully held as slaves under the law OF
SPAIN and recognised by those laws property capa-
BILE of being lawfully bought and sold, we see no rea-
SON why they may mot be justly deemed within the
intent Of the treaty be included under the denom-
nation of merchandise land, such, ought to be res
tored to the clamants for upon that point the laws
of SPAN would to furnish the proper rule OF in
depreciation But, admitting this, is clear IN our
opinion that neither of the other essential facts and
requisites has been established in proof and the onus
proband of both lies upon the claimants 10 give rise to
the fsJers II is plain, beyond controversy, II
examine the evidence, that these negroes never
the lawful slaves of Ruiz Montez or of any
other Spanish subjects.
They natives of Africa and kidnapped
there and were unlawfully transported TO Cuba, in vi
olaton of the law and treaties of SPAIN and the most
solemn edct and declarations Of that Government BY
those laws and treaties and edicts the African slave
trade is utterly aboshedthe dealing in that trade is
deemed heinous crime; and the negroes thereby in
troduced into the domnons of Spain declared TO
he free. Ruiz and Montez are proved TO have made
the pretended purchase of these negroes with full
knowledge of all the circumstances, and cogent and
irresistible is the evidence in this respect that the Dis
trict Attorney has admitted in open Court, upon the
record that these negroes native Africans, and
recently imported into Cuba, alleged in their an
to the libels in the The supposed proprie
tary interest," then, of Ruiz and Montez completely
displaced if at liberty TO look at the evidence
the admissions OF the District Attorney IT, them these
negroes are not slaves, but are kidnapped Africans
who by the laws of Spain ITSELF are entitled to their
freedom and were kidnapped and illegally carried to
Cuba, and illegally detained and restrained board of
the Amstad, there is pretence TO say that Il ey
pirates robbers. We may lament the dreadful acts
by which they asserted their liberty, and took posses
sion of the Amsted and endeavored to regain their
native country but they cannot be deemed pirates
robbers in the of the law of nations the treaty
with Span the laws of Spain ITSELF at least SO far
there laws have been brought to our knowledge ;
nor do the libels of Ruiz and Montez assert them
to be such.
This posture of the facts would seem Of itself to put
an end to the whole inquiry upon the merits But it
is argued, behalf OF the United States that the
ship and cargo and negroes were duly documented as
belonging to Spanish subjects, and this court have no
right to look behind these documents that full faith
and credit is to be given TO them and that they are
be held conclusive evidence in this cause al
though il should be established by the most sasfac-
tory proofs that they have been obtained by the
grossest frauds and imposit upon the constituted
authorities of Spain To this argument we can in no
wise assent There is nothing in the treaty which JUS
titles or sustains the argument Wedo not here med
die with the point whether there has been any comm
vance in this illegal traffic the part of any of the
colonial authorities or subordinate officers of Cuba,
because, IN our vew such examination is unne-
cessary, and ought not to be pursued unless it
indispensable to public justice, although it has been
strongly pressed at the bar What proceed upon is
this; that although public documents Of the govern
ment accompanying property found on board of the
private ships OF foreign nation certainly are to be
deemed prmd face evidence of the facts which they
purpor TO state, yet they always open to be i'm
pugned for fraud and whether that fraud be in the
gnal obtaining othese documents in the subsequent
fraudulent and Illegal Of them when once it
tsiactory established it ovethrows all their sanctty,
and destroys them proofs. Fraud will vtate any,
the most solemn transactions and asserted title
to property founded upon it is utterly void The very
language of the 9Th article of the treaty of 1875
quires the proprietor TO make due and sufficient proof
of his property and how that proof be deemed
either due sufficient which is but connected and
stained tissue Of fraud This is not mere rule of
municipal Jurisprudence. Nothing is more clear in
the law of nations established rule TO regulate
their rights and duties and intercourse than the doc
trine that the ships papers but prma tacic evil
dence, and that, II they shown TO be fraudulent
they are not to be held proof of any valid title This
rule is Familiarity applied, and indeed is of every day
occurrence in of nrze in the contests between
bclligerents and neuras as is apparent from
to be found in the reports of this Court and 1t
is just applicable to the transactions of civil inter
between nations Of III n nriv
ship clothed with Spanish papers should enter the