United States V. The Amistad - Lower Court Proceedings

Lower Court Proceedings

A case before the Circuit Court in Hartford, Connecticut, was filed in September 1839, alleging mutiny and murder. The court ruled that it lacked jurisdiction, because the alleged acts took place on a Spanish ship in Spanish waters.

Various parties then filed property claims to many of the captives, to the ship, and to its cargo before the lower District Court: Ruiz and Montez, Lieutenant Gedney, and Captain Henry Green (who had met the Africans while on shore on Long Island and claimed to have helped in their capture). The Spanish government asked that the ship, cargo and slaves be restored to Spain under the Pinckney treaty of 1795 between Spain and the United States. Article 9 of this treaty holds that "all ships and merchandises of what nature soever, which shall be rescued out of the hands of pirates or robbers on the high seas, …shall be restored, entire, to the true proprietor." The United States filed this claim on behalf of Spain.

The abolitionist movement had formed the "Amistad Committee", headed by New York City merchant Lewis Tappan, and had collected money to mount a defense of the Africans. Initially, communication with the Africans was difficult, since they spoke neither English nor Spanish. Professor J. Willard Gibbs, Sr. learned to count to ten in the Mende language, went to the harbor of New York City, and counted aloud in front of sailors until he located a person able to understand and translate. That person was James Covey, a twenty-year-old sailor of the British man-of-war HMS Buzzard. Covey was himself a former slave from West Africa.

The abolitionists filed charges of assault, kidnapping, and false imprisonment against Ruiz and Montez. Their arrest in New York City in October 1839 outraged pro-slavery rights advocates and the Spanish government. Montes immediately posted bail and went to Cuba, while Ruiz "more comfortable in a New England setting (and entitled to many amneities not available to the Africans), hoped to garner further public support by staying in jail....Ruiz, however, soon tired of his martyred lifestyle in jail and posted bond. Like Montes, he returned to Cuba". Outraged, Spanish minister Cavallero Pedro Alcantara Argaiz made "caustic accusations against America's judicial system and continued to condemn the abolitionist affront. Ruiz's imprisonment only added to Argaiz's anger, and he pressured Forsyth to seek ways to throw out the case altogether." The Spanish also held that the bailbonds that the men had to acquire (so that they could leave jail and return to Cuba) caused them a grave financial burden, and "by the treaty of 1795, no obstacle or impediment should have placed" in their way.

On January 7, 1840, all the parties (except for Ruiz and Montez, who were represented by the Spanish minister) appeared before the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut and presented their arguments.

The abolitionists' main argument before the District Court was that a treaty between Britain and Spain of 1817 and a subsequent pronouncement by the Spanish government had outlawed the slave trade across the Atlantic. It was established that the slaves had been captured in Mendiland (also spelled Mendeland, current Sierra Leone) in Africa, sold to a Portuguese trader in Lomboko (south of Freetown) in April 1839, and taken to Havana illegally on a Portuguese ship. The Africans were therefore not slaves, but victims of illegal kidnapping and free to go. Their papers wrongly identified them as slaves who had been in Cuba since before 1820, a common practice in Cuba condoned by government officials.

U.S. President Martin Van Buren, who did not have strong opinions on the slavery question but was concerned about relations with Spain and about his re-election prospects in the southern states, sided with the Spanish position; he ordered a U.S. schooner to New Haven Harbor to return the Africans to Cuba immediately after a favorable decision, before any appeals could be decided.

The District Court, however, agreed with the abolitionists, ordering in January 1840 that La Amistad and its cargo be given to Lieutenant Gedney; and the Africans be returned to their homeland by the U.S. government. (The federal government had outlawed the slave trade between the U.S. and other countries in 1808, and a law from 1818, amended in 1819, provided for the return of all illegally traded slaves.) The captain's slave Antonio was declared the rightful property of the captain's heirs and was ordered restored to Cuba (some sources say he willingly returned to Cuba, while other sources claim that he escaped to New York, or to Canada, with the help of an abolitionist group).

In detail, the District Court ruled as follows:

• It rejected the claim of the U.S. Attorney, argued on behalf of the Spanish minister, for the restoration of the slaves.
• It dismissed the claims of Ruiz and Montez.
• It ordered that the captives be delivered to the custody of the President of the United States for transportation to Africa, since they were, in fact, legally free.
• It allowed the Spanish vice-consul to claim the slave Antonio.
• It allowed Lt. Gedney to claim one-third of the property on board La Amistad.
• It allowed Tellincas, Aspe, and Laca to claim one-third of the property.
• It dismissed the claims of Green and Fordham for salvage.

The U.S. Attorney for the District of Connecticut, on order of Van Buren, immediately appealed to the U.S. Circuit Court for the Connecticut District. He challenged every part of the District Court's ruling except the concession of the slave Antonio to the Spanish vice-consul. Tellincas, Aspe, and Laca also appealed the denial of their salvage. Ruiz and Montez, as well as the owners of La Amistad, did not appeal.

This court affirmed (upheld) the District Court's decision in April 1840. From there, the U.S. Attorney appealed to the United States Supreme Court.