Viewing page 7 of 32

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

7

contrary to the laws of the United States, that the Court will make such order as will enable the President to send them to Africa pursuant to the act of Congress in such case provided.

On the 19th of November, the District Attorney filed another suggestion similar to the first, omitting only the alternative prayer; and on each of these suggestions, a warrant of seizure was issued by the Court, and the Africans were again taken into custody thereon.

To these several libels, claims, and suggestions, the Africans, who, when seized, were in the condition of freemen, capable of having and enforcing rights of their own, severally answered: that they were born free, —and were kidnapped  in their native country, and forcibly and unlawfully transported to Cuba;—that they were wrongfully and fraudulently put on board of the Schooner Amistad by Ruiz ad Montez, under color of permits, fraudulently obtained and used; that after achieving their own deliverance they sought asylum in the State of New York, by the laws of which hey were free; and that while there, they were illegally seized by Lieutenant Gedney, and brought into the District of Connecticut.

The District Court found these allegations in substance to be true, and therefore dismissed the libels of Ruiz and Montez, and the suggestion or claim made by the United States on their behalf; but in accordance with the alternative prayer by the District Attorney in behalf of the United States, decreed that the Africans should be delivered to the Executive to be sent back to Africa.

From the finding and decree of the District Court, neither Ruiz nor Montez, nor Gedney have appealed. They voluntarily sought, by their libels, the action of the Court, and submitted to the decision against them. They might have appealed, but chose not to avail themselves of the privilege.

The Spanish minister never made himself a party to the proceedings in the Court, either as the Representative of the Government, or of the subjects of Spain. It is true, the decree of the District Court speaks of "the claim of the minister of Spain which demands the surrender of Cinque and others,"—as if it were a claim made by him in Court, and dismisses it. It also speaks of the claims of Ruiz and Montez as being "included under the claim of the minister of Spain," and dismisses them also.

But the Record shows that no appearance or claim was ever made in Court, by the Spanish minister; and it appears by the correspondence transmitted to the House of Representatives, (doc. 185, 26 Cong. p. 6,