The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1854-01-05

fl0QlcAbe MIN.
Sir, on the first page Of that report | fad
gross misrepresentation, fragrant fslsehood-
one that is important In considering the case.
1t sets forth that these negroes and the schooner
Amlstad was taken possession Of by Lieut..
Gedney on the Goth August, A. D. 1910, when
the record of the District Court of the State of
Connecticut, and every newspaper then pub.
llshed IN that part of the country, the history
OF the times, and our own recollection, shows
that event to have occurred on the 10th Of Au-
gust, A. ID. 1899, instead of 1910.
On psge 10 the report admits that they were
landed at Havana on the 18th June 1889, as
the court decided, and then asserts that they
must have been fourteen months in CubGn
The apparent intention of making the false
statement that they were taken possession of
in 1910 was to lay the foundation of this false
conclusion, that these negroes had been In Gu
ba fourteen months, instead of sirteen days, as
the testimony shows. Were this assertion true,
it would show that the negroes had not been
imported so recently as the court supposed, and
would have led to the conclusion that the
judges may hare mistaken the proofs ON other
points. Bat, to effect this object it was neces.
sary to start eff with a palpable fslsehood.
Why, sir, as heretofore stated the claim of
MOntez and Ruiz was fled in the District
Court Of Connecticut on the goth August, 1889,
being only ttoo months G1d seventeen days from
the time the negroes were first landed in Cuba,
while the report asserts that they were four
teen months in Cuba.
Sir, call the attention Of the Chairman of
the Committee on Foreign Affairs to this mis-
representation of his predecessor. | ask him
to e-fr:lain this fragrant falsehood, and show us
how it occurred
|, sir, entertain no unkind feelings towards
NTH Of hot hv,k
duty TO place these matters accurately upon
the record of our debates, that those who come
after us shall be able to understand this sub
ject.
And, sir, this is the report to which the Pres
ident refers US for a guide--a report bearing
upon its face such obvious Misrepresentation
and will remark here that, for this purpose,
it is totally immaterial whether the falsehood
was designed or occurred through the ignorance
or inattention Of the author for put which
construction upon it you please, and it will be
acknowledged on all hands that the report is
unworthy of confidence.
1t were probably useless to follow this report
further, for the purpose Of satisfying this body
of its real character but see that this claim
IS to live 80 long as the Slave Power has infu-
ence In this Government; and desire to show
our successors the statesmauship, the views en-
tertained by the author of this report and now
quoted by the President as an authority to
guide intelligent members of this body in the
discharge of their official duties.
The report urges that the "psrmits,p to
which referred in the opening of my remarks
were CONCLUSIVE evidence, showing these Afri-
cans to have been. lddinos,n that is, legal
sldUeS. This Committee will bear in mind that
these certificates were given by the proper off
GER and showed that Montez and Ruiz had
paid the duties requisite to authorize them to
carry ffty-two legal SLAVES from Havana to
Principe. But the idea that such permits were
evidence, to any extent, as between them and
the negroes, or was even admissible testimony
TO show that these negroes were Slaves Is a
proposition too absurd to require argument be-
fore any tribunal. Yet when the author of
this report goes further, and argues that these
permits were Conclusive evidence, and that no
proof of fraud could be permitted to show that
Montez and Ruiz attempted to transport free.
men under those permits, instead of legal slaves
the position besomes ridiculous and sets all ar
gument at defiance. The mere statement of
the proposition Is probably the most perfect
retutatlon that can be given to it, and such was
the opinion of the Supreme Court Yet this
report gravely attempts to show that the court
erred in permitting evidence to be given that
MOntez and Ruiz fraudulently attempted to
transport recently-imported Africans under
permit to transport legal slaves. Now. sir. if
the decisions of the Suprenfs5 Curt are 20 De
questioned and examined in his body, | insist
It shall be done in style NOR lawyer. like and
more scientific than has been done in that re-
part. But the aesher e'eesSS@--S ~ AaEebee1 ap-
prehensive that this House and nation might
recognise that well known psinciple of interna-
tional law, which has for ages existed and been
oalry LII,
that no sLave can be held as such, tcithtn the ill.,
risdictsOn Of free Iatcs. Under this rule when
the Amistad arrived within our waters-wben
she came within the Jurisdiction of our laws
these people were free, and would have been
Free even if held as slaves in Cuba, agreeably
TO her laws.
| will here add, that it is on admitted
principle, that the laws Of every Government
nOe only extend over all the barbcrs. bays and
rivers of such nation, but the Jurisdiction of
those laws extend marine league into the sea-
Thus, when foreign ship comes within ma
rine league Of our shores, our revenue officers
enter on board, examine her bills of lading
and take all necessary measures TO prevent
fraud upon our revenue; our health officers 90
on board, and examine her bills of health our
pilots enter on board, conduct the vessel into
port, and demand their legal fees. In short
our laws take jurisdiction of the ship and crew
Now, sir, when the Amistad came within our
jurisdiction, when our laws spread their aegis
over the people on board, it was matter of
course that those people were as free to 90
where they pleased as were Montez and Ruiz
Indeed, those Spaniards were themselves re-
stored to liberty by the force of our laws and
the negroes, had they been held as legal slaves
In Cuba, under Spanish laws, would have been
as free, the moment they came within our iu-
risdlctiOn, as were Nontez and Ruiz. This
rule was recognised in England during the
reign of Queen Elizabeth and on the conti
nent it was acknowledged and enforced. at
even an earlier day, and think, WA meyer
doubted nor denied until the year 1910. when
the Senate of the United States adopted resou-
tons declaring that a ship driven into the mort
Of friendly Power by stress o. weather, or
other unavoidable accident carries with her
she laws of the Government from whence she
sailed, and all the relations of the people ON
board, which existed under the laws of such
/ Government. In other words, the substance of
the resolutions was that slave ship, when
driven into friendly port by stress of weather,
may hold her slaves in the same manner az
she would in the port from which she sailed.
The author of the report quotes these resolu
tions to show that the Spanish slave ship Amis-
tad had right to come into New London, or
New York, and that the slave dealers could
hold their slaves in such port, provided they
had been legal slaves in Cuba; cond fog them,
cast overheard the sick, or shoot down the re-
fractory, as they would in the middle pas
sage"
Now, sir, these resolutions were manuf1c-
ttIred to order. The American slave ship En-
TERPRIsE," sailing, think, from Charleston IN
1884, was driven by stress of weather into
9 Port Hamilton" in the island Of Bermuda.