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

ty of the law if taken in the act of carryin.
on those negroes against their will after the,
were landed any more than before
How men stolen from their homes. in viola
ton of all law and right, and rescued them
selves out of the hands of their captors, ant
returning to that home, can be called "p,
rates. is beyond comprehension.
.. There never was any "proof' offered tc
show these Africans the property of the
claimants. In the nature of the case this
could not be done. So that the case falls
within no single provision of the 9th article
of the treaty!
d. The vessel and owners were themselves
engaged in an act of piracy and robbery ms
much as if no landing had ever been effected
IN Cuba, and they had been transferred on
the high seas from one vessel to the other it
was continuation of the piracy, and the
vessel was contraband and forfeited, with all
property of her owners on board. which
would have included "Antonio," if he could
have been deemed " chattel," by the laws
of the United States.
D. The facts were ascertained bv the Court
in . case in which the claimants ,cere part;es
10 The record in fact; and, although the
decision of the Supreme Court is no estonncl
upon the coordinate branch of the govern
mcnt-the legislatve-stil. MS its decision
was Just it should be respected, and made n
finaitv.
d. The Court had power, and Congress
has power, to go behind hc record-the por
mnLs of the Governor General of Cuba but
whether this be done or no, it is clear that
the permits authorized only the transfer of
fGgdf sfdccs. These Africans werc not such
slaves. When that fact was proved. it bo-
came apparent that the attempts to smurrlc
them through under the authority of this
permit was gross fraud, which the papers
did not and could not Justify.
pirate on the high seas NAV have legal
papers as Il merchant resse1, but when the
fact of his actual character is proved by evi-
dence dhende, the papers are no protection
they are only prima fac,e evidence, liable to
be contradicted by competent proof
pirate is an outlaw, and liable to he
punished by any nation taking him, and no
Obligation exists to deliver up pirates to the
government they purport to belong Kent
vol. |, 202
The case of the "Amedie " was the earliest
decision in the English Courts on the great
question touching the legality of the slave
trade on general principles of international
law. That was the case of an American ves-
sci employed in carrying Slaves from the
coast OF Africa to Spanish colony. She wa.
captured by an English cruiser, and the
vessel and cargo were condemned to the
captors in vice admiralty court in the West
indies, and on appeal to the Court of Appeals
in England. the judgment was affirmed Sir
w llliam Grant, who pronounced the opinion
of the Court, observed that s.the slave trade
being abolishedby both Englan1 and the L S,
the Court was authorized to assert that the
trade abstractly speaking, could not have a lc-
climate existence, and was pr,n,o facie illegal,
upon the principles of universal law The
cld'mdnt 10 enht1e him 10 restitution. must
shor gGirmnhrelY r!2M Of property undcr
me m"''c'poi 'ams his ora country: for If
II be unprotected By its o,cn muaicipd lair, he
can hare no riqht Of property in human hcings
carr'ed as his sfares, for such clam is contrary
10 he principles Of justice and humanity. -
(henfs Com, 1879
lnls claim is not supported therefore, by
the facts or the law so as to authorize Con-
gress to make provision for It's payment.
WILLIAM II. SEWARD.
SOLOMON FooT.
Enbrunrv 1879