Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1841-03-23

vas in,erposed by Ruiz or Monez behalf of the
! representatives of the owner OF the Aniistad. Inc
Circuit Court, by mere pro iorma ceeree, aii'
the decree of the District Court rcservng the question
of .alyape upon the claims OF Iclncas and hspe ana
Iaca And from that decree the present appear mas
been brought to this Court :,
Tho canse has been very deliberately argued well
upon the merits as upon motion on oeialt OF the APP
na,,.s IN dismiss the appeal On the part of the ". >.
bas been contended j. That due and sufficient proof
concerning the property has been made to authorize the
restitution of the vessel ca!g" and negroes to the Spa
nish subjects whose behalf they are claimed pursu
ant to the treaty with Spain Of the 9th OF October
1895 2 That the IT, 5. have right to intervene IN
the in which they have DONE TO obtain decree
for the restitution of the property upon the application
Of the Spanish Minister These propositions have been
stenuousy denied on the other side. Other collateral
and incidental points have been stated upon WHICH Is
not necessary at this moment TO dwell.
| Before entering upon the discussion OF the man
ponts I'M olyed in this interesting and important con-
troversv it may lie necessary to say lew words as TO
the actual posture of the II how STANDS before
rs In the first place, then, the only parties now be-
,re tho court on the one side are the United States
intervening for the sole purpose OF procuring resu
ton of the property Spanish property, pursuant to
the treaty, upon the grounds stated by the other parties
claiming the property in their respective hbes Inc
United States do assert any property IN themselves
or any violation of their rights sovereignty,
laws by the acts complained Of They do not insist
that these negroes have been imported into the United
States in contravention Of slave trade acts
They do moi seek TO have these negroes delivered up
for the purpose of being transported 10 Cuba pirates
or robbers fugitive criminals found within our ter
rorips who have been guilty of offences against the
laws of Spain They do not assert that the seizure and
bringing the vessel and cargo aud negroes into port by
Lieut., Gelney for the purpose of adjudication, is
tor;uous act They simply coG6ne themselves TO the
right Of the Spanish claimants 10 the restitution oil their
property upon the facts asserted in their respective al
legations
In the next place the parties before the Court the
other side as appeees, are Lieut. Gedney on his libel
for salvage and the negroes (Cnquez and others) as
sernu themselves in their answer not 10 be slaves hui
free native Americans kidnapped in their own country,
and illegally transported by force from that country,
and now entitled 10 maintain their freedom,
No question has been here made as to the proprietary
nteres, in the vessel and cargo. rs admitted tha
they belong to Spanish Subjects and that they ought
to he restored. The only point on tins head IS wh'
Their the restitution ought 10 be upon the payment o.
SALVAGE or not The main controversy is, whether
| thsse neoroes are the property Of Ruiz and Monez
and ought 10 be delivered up; and to this according
IL we shall first direct attention. IL has been ar
Gued OH behalf of the United States, that the Iouri
are bound deliver them up according 10 the reay OF
i l7g5 with Spain, which has, in this particular, been
continued IN full force by the treaty Of lcl', Tatihcd
in 1921 The sixth article of that treaty seems TO have
had principally in where the property "i 'he
subjects of either State had been taken possession OF
4
war The eighth article provides for cases where The
shining of tie inhabitants Of either State are forced,
through stress Of wcaher-pnrsut OF p'rales OF enc
miles, or any other urgent necessity 10 seek seier ~
the ports Of the other. There may wen De some
doubt entertained whether the present case, III It's
actual circumstances, falls within the purview OF
this article. But it does not seem necessary, Tor
reasons hereafter stated, absolutely 10 dccice ~ Inc
ninth article provides, "That all ships and ner-
chandse of what nature soever, which shall be res
I If ii,p hands of robbers, on
the hiuh seas shall be brought into some port OF el.
Their State and shall be delivered 10 The custody oil
that port order TO be taken care OF and restored en-
tire the proprietor ms soon az due and sucenl
proof shall be made concerning The property thereof
This is the article which the main reliance IS placed
on behalf the L. s for the restitution OF these ne
goes To bring the within the article il is essen
tal 10 establish First That these negroes, under all The
circumstances fall within The description OF mercan-
disc in the Of the treaty. Secondly. That there
has been rescue Of them the mig out Of The
hands Of pirates and robbers Which, the present case,
can only be b. showing that they themselves pirates
and robbers and, Thirdly. That Ruiz and Aon.ez, the
asserted propretors have established their title BY COM
petent proofs Ii these negroes at the time law
fully bought and sold, We see no reason why they
NAV (not be Justly deemed within the intent Of the
treaty, be included under the denomination OF mer.
chantise (and) such, ought to be restored 10 The
claimants for upon that point, the laws OF Span would
seem TO furnish the proper rule of Interpretation.
But, admitting this, 1t is clear, IN our opinion that
neither Of the other essential facts and requisites has
been established in proof; and the onns probanM OF
both lies upon the claimants to give rise 10 the
tirderiS 1t is plain beyond controversy, If we examine
the evidence, that these negroes the law
fu slaves of Ruiz and Montez Of any other Spanish
subjects.
They are natives of Africa, and kidnapped
there, and unawfny transported TO Cuba in vlo-
ation of the laws aud treaties OF Span and the most
solemn edcts and declarations of that Government
Bv those laws and treaties and edcts the African slave
trade is deemed helnous crime: and the negroes
thereby introduced into the domnions OF Spain de-
clared 10 be free. Ruiz and Montez proved 10
have made the pretended purchase of these negroes
with full knowledge of all the circumstances, ard
so coaent and irresistible is the evidence in this
spect that the District Attorney has admitted open
Court, upon the record, that these negroes
tive Africans; and recently imported into GUS, as al
legged in their TO the be!s in the The sup
posed proprietary interest," them of Ruiz and Monez is
ompetey displaced if are at liberty TO look at the
evidence the admissions OF the District Attorney.
if then, these negroes are not slaves, out are konap
ped Africans who, by the laws OF Spain itself,
titled to their freed and kidnapped and illegal
y carried to Cuba, and illegally detained and restrained
on board Of the .misad, there no preence to say
that they are pirates robbers. We may lament the
dreadful acts by which they asserted their Liberty and
took Of the AmIsiad and endeavored 10
gain their native country but they cannot be deemed
pirates robbers the of the law OF nations,
the treaty with Spain, or the laws OF SPAN itseli, al
least far those laws have been brought TO our know
ledge; nor do the bels Of RUIZ and Monez assert them
10 he such
This posture Of the facts would of itself 10 put
an end 10 the whole inquiry upon the merits. But IL
is argued behalf of the United States, that the ship
and cargo and negroes were duly docunencd as be-
longing TO Spanish subjects, and this Court have
right To look behind these documents that full faith
and credit to lie to them and that they are 10
be held conclusive evidence this cause, al
Though it should he established by the most satsacto
ry proofs that they have been obtained by the grosses
frauds and impostons upon The constituted nuthor
ties of Spain. To this argument We can in no wise
assent There is nothing III the treaty which justi!rs
or snstains the argument. We do not here NEEDLE
will, the point whether there has been any connyance
in this illegal traffic the part of any of the colonial
authorities or subordinate officers of Cuba, because
our vew such an examination is unnecessary, and
ought not to be pursued unless il indispensable
public Justice although it has been strongly pressed
nj ,Ls bar What n1nceed il ilis ihat al