Burlington free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1827-1865, 1859-01-07

The claimants, on the 20th of August
lS39, filed their claim in the District Cour
OF the United States, demanding these Alr
cans as their slaves, and requiring their rem
dition under our treaty stipulat;ons will
spain and on the 10Th day OF September
the Africans filed their answer, denying tha
they We're, or ever had been. slaves to Monte
ana kuiz, or any other person, but that the
We're Tree, and always had been.
The case was ably tried and fnllv argued
in the District Court, and decided in favor o
the Africans, thus establishing their freedom
An appeal was taken from this decision t,
the Circuit Court. in which the judgmen
below was affirmed
From thisiudgment the cas-, was removed
to the Supreme Court of the United States
where, after due consideration and advise.
ment, the decision was rcanirmcd.
The Court says at is plain, beyond
controversy, If we examine the evidence,
that the negroes never were the legal slaves
oil kuiz and Montca, or of any other Spanish
subject. They were natives of Africa, and
were kidnapped thence, and were unlawfully
Transported to Cuba, in violation of the laws
and treaties of Spain. and the most solemn
cdlcts anu d clarttibu, vi tn,lV t,Jytrnnnnt.
hy ih'ir Lave and treaties and cdcts the AZ
rican slave ira 10 is utterly abolished. The
deG3ag IN that trade is deemed n hcinous
crime, and the negroes thereafter introduced
into the domini0ns of Spain are declarcd 10
be. free. Ruiz and Montoz are proved to have
made the pretended purchase of these no.
grocs with full knowlcdte ofall the circum-
stances; and 50 cogent and irresistible is
the evidence in this respect, that the District
Attorney has admitted in open court, upon
the record, that the negroes were native AZ
/
ALLEGED in their answer !,
Every facility was afforded hv tho presi-
dent to these claimants. Learned counsel
were cmrlovod on tn. orrnmont md n
vessel Of the United Statos was detailed 70
deliver ~ + the negro. irts... carr s., aid
I.,ncc them s1ya,. Vl.y VIZ. =. at
iih,rty a. C..ni,cu L,. , ,,,u ,..,s,l...,d
ind .H,n+ ur tto l;.-L.. L,,1 ,,.it,,,.l -
tho c,untry ,v,oro -, CO. 49,, I;.,,,.i'. :,
i>src.--N5 p,tcrs'I- : ponnrt.
Tho v...el ,y,s soII G,r s,i,.,,,p IT, ~,
Sov Antonin >, osc,,,d a,,d t.,,, r,,,
wirls f,nnd
,o g.,
s,licit ''I' c . i'i'''l,.:r' however at the
- VI .'o (i"'niantS' nr'ush1 the
'.io '''en.'}', oi tnG ffesideht OF
(Io ,."''rN :. anu 'io',' io9' 10 tniS 'lme
:. ''':o 'so' "'"'c the saiJect oi
ii,.a.;ia'. "s.V,,.t ~ ~ III s'''t way =.
,l,d o-,r 1Vi' !lcl Drought IL 70 the notice OF
i9i5 itiI oI ea Io"sIesS' IN speclal message, In
"o''i III i0ff anu fresiaeht
f'lK: IN lS4', notwithstanding the above
decision, recommended to Congress to ap-
prppflat' means Tor the payment of this
claim. thus solcmnly adjudgcd to have no
validity:
Inc nited States are in no manner COM
n fn tipf,- Il Il.
these executive recommendations made in
the face of an adjudication of our highest
courts. aHd without any new facts on which
to base them.
Stlll, as the frequency and rnrtinacitv
with which this claim is urged, and especial
" by the present Executive in his message of
December ;, lS3S. who uses the following
'h%"h%e IN respect to it ''Our minister has
met win 'he Objection that Congress has
'f',r lAal' tne appropriations recommended
.! ir'SlIeut FOLK IN December. lSl7, to be
'di' O. tno Spanish Government, for the pur-
,osc ol "l'tflpution among the claimants in
me An'StAd case. y similar rocommnnda-
'oi' was made hy my immediate predecessor,
n n ms message OF December, 1888, and en- |
irely cohcurfihG with both in the opinion |
''a' 'hi' indemnity Is justly due, under the |
,reaty Wlth SPAN OF the 2Ith of October, |
l'92' earnestly recommend such an ap-
oropriatlon to the favorable consideration Of
-ongress' calls upon and .iustiies the mi
lorlty committee IN giving 1t careful con
alteration, and they have no hesitation in
commenting the rejection of the claim, for
he following among other reasons
fTN-ltuiz and Montc2, the Cuban claim
'nts, had no properly in these Africans, and
'ould not have held them, even by the laws
tl,, g. IL Il
states Court had been asccrtained before a
spanish tribunal. they having been kidnapp-
u ana stolen from Africa in violation of ma
.lonal law, by an act Of piracy, and these
claimants buying them with full knowledge,
acquired no rights in them superior to those
'osscssed by their original captors.
he crown OF Spain, in lel7, in treaty
Si'h ufeat britain, agreed to abolish the
nave trade and declare it piracy by its de-
retai order, made soon after, it declared the
la'c trade abolished through all her domln-
ohs, including her colonies, and asserted the
Fefdom Of all 4 fI7cans who should be there
ytT mported into any of her national or
olonial ports As the Africans were import-
Il into Cuba after the passage of this ordi-
lancc, they We're free by the law of Snain.
Their capture was piracy; their detention in
bondage by any one was Illegal these claim
'hlS, therefore, had no property in them.
'nt were themselves violators of law, and
leld them in unlawful imprisonment
If these negroes were not property" by
he laws of Spain, it is too plain for argu-
nent that their pretended owners have no
ust claim to indcmnny against us. The
Principle was decided in the case of the
'Anedie. "a Acton Reps, 2i0.)
Oar obligations in this respect are supposed
o arise out OF the Sth, 9th and 10th articles
II our tleaty with Spain.
ART 3. In ease the subjects and nhab-
tlnts Of either party, with their shipping,
whether public and Of war, or private or
nerchants, be forced through stress of
Weather, pursuit of pirates or enemies, or
ny other urgent necessity for seeking of