Appellant
United States
Appellees
Joseph Cinque, et al.
Appellant's Claim
That the slaves aboard the Amistad should be convicted of mutiny.
Chief Lawyer for Appellant
Harry D. Gilpin, U.S. Attorney General
Chief Lawyers for Appellees
John Quincy Adams, Roger S. Baldwin
Justices for the Court
Philip P. Barbour, John Catron, John McKinley, John McLean, Joseph Story (writing for the Court), Smith Thompson, Roger Brooke Taney, James M. Wayne
Justices Dissenting
Henry Baldwin
Place
Washington, D.C.
Date of Decision
January 1841
Decision
The Court would not convict the participants in the Amistad mutiny.
Significance
When the courts refused to convict slaves from the schooner Amistad after they killed their captors in order to free themselves, the decision was widely hailed as a victory for the cause of abolition.
By the 1830s, many countries were beginning to take steps to limit the age-old institution of slavery. Although slavery was still legal in the U.S., it was illegal to bring new slaves into the country. Further, the abolitionist movement, which sought to do away with slavery altogether, was gaining more andmore support. Great Britain was strongly in favor of abolition, and had usedits naval power to pressure Spain, whose colonies were dominated by slaveowners, to also make it illegal to bring new slaves into any Spanish possessions.
Spanish power in the New World was declining, however, and the government inMadrid lacked the power to enforce its will. The wealthy landowners in Cuba and elsewhere throughout the Spanish New World needed slaves to work their estates, but obeying the import restriction meant waiting for the children of existing slaves to mature. To meet the growing demand for slaves, an illegal slave trade soon emerged. Slavers went to the west coast of Africa, captured healthy young black men and women, and brought them back to Cuba for sale. Thecolonial authorities did nothing to stop this trade. In 1839, slavers broughtback a cargo of slaves from what is now Sierra Leone. Among the slaves was ayoung man they named Joseph Cinque.
In June of 1839, Jose Ruiz and Pedro Montes purchased 49 captured Africans, including Cinque, in Havana for their estates in the Cuban town of Puerto Principe. Ruiz and Montes put the slaves aboard the schooner Amistad, intending to sail from Havana up the Cuban coast to Puerto Principe. The Spanishcrew taunted the ignorant slaves, telling them wild stories, such as that their new owners intended to kill and eat them when they arrived. On the night of 1 July, Cinque led the blacks in a successful rebellion and seized controlof the ship. Several members of the crew were killed during the struggle, butRuiz and Montes survived. Cinque ordered Ruiz and Montes to take the ship back to Africa.
The Spaniards sailed east for Africa by day, but secretly reversed course bynight. For nearly two months the Amistad meandered back and forth, buteventually winds and currents drove it north to the coast of the United States. On 26 August, the U.S.S. Washington spotted the Amistad offthe coast of New York, seized the ship, and brought it into New London, Connecticut.
Cinque on Trial
In New London, Ruiz and Montes described the slave rebellion to the Americanauthorities, and pressed their claim for the return of the Amistad with its cargo of slaves. Despite the illegal capture of the slaves, the Spanishgovernment backed Ruiz's and Montes' claim. With the blessing of President Martin Van Buren's administration, District Attorney William S. Holabird charged Cinque and the other blacks with committing murder and piracy aboard the Amistad.
The trial was held in the U.S. District Court for Connecticut. The judge wasdistrict court judge Andrew T. Judson, assisted by Supreme Court Justice Smith Thompson. The abolitionists hired a team of defense lawyers to represent the blacks, comprised of Roger S. Baldwin, Joshua Leavitt, Seth Staples and theex-president of the United States, John Quincy Adams.
The trial began on 19 November 1839. The defense lawyers asserted that the blacks had the right to free themselves from the horrible conditions of slavery. In support of their position, they introduced Dr. Richard R. Madden, who had travelled extensively in Cuba and was an expert on slave conditions:
Further, as the testimony of Madden and various witnesses made clear, returning Cinque and the others to Cuba meant certain death at the hands of the pro-slavery colonial authorities. In addition, since the blacks had originally been captured in Africa in violation of Spanish law, the abolitionists argued that the blacks were not legally slaves and therefore were not "property" belonging to Ruiz and Montes.
Despite pressure from the Van Buren administration, which wanted to avoid diplomatic tension with Spain, on 13 January 1840 Judge Judson ruled in favor ofthe Africans. Although the Amistad with its goods would be returned to Ruiz and Montes, subject to salvage costs, Cinque and the others:
Further, because they had been illegally enslaved, the Africans were ruled tobe innocent of murder and piracy since they had only acted to free themselves. The prosecution appealed Judson's decision to the Supreme Court. The abolitionists had anticipated this move, since five Supreme Court justices, including Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, were Southerners and had owned slaves. Thedefense relied on John Quincy Adams to present their case, banking on his prestige as much as on his legal ability.
On 22 February 1840 the Supreme Court heard both sides of the argument, and on 9 March issued its opinion. The Court upheld Judson's decision, and so theblacks were finally free. Cinque and the others were returned to Africa.
Technically, the Amistad decision did not condemn slavery. It only held that Africans who were not legally slaves could not be considered property.Still, the courts could have easily turned Cinque over to Spanish authorities or returned them to Cuba. Therefore, the case was seen as a victory for theabolitionist cause, and was a milestone in the movement's quest for the total elimination of slavery.
United States
Appellees
Joseph Cinque, et al.
Appellant's Claim
That the slaves aboard the Amistad should be convicted of mutiny.
Chief Lawyer for Appellant
Harry D. Gilpin, U.S. Attorney General
Chief Lawyers for Appellees
John Quincy Adams, Roger S. Baldwin
Justices for the Court
Philip P. Barbour, John Catron, John McKinley, John McLean, Joseph Story (writing for the Court), Smith Thompson, Roger Brooke Taney, James M. Wayne
Justices Dissenting
Henry Baldwin
Place
Washington, D.C.
Date of Decision
January 1841
Decision
The Court would not convict the participants in the Amistad mutiny.
Significance
When the courts refused to convict slaves from the schooner Amistad after they killed their captors in order to free themselves, the decision was widely hailed as a victory for the cause of abolition.
By the 1830s, many countries were beginning to take steps to limit the age-old institution of slavery. Although slavery was still legal in the U.S., it was illegal to bring new slaves into the country. Further, the abolitionist movement, which sought to do away with slavery altogether, was gaining more andmore support. Great Britain was strongly in favor of abolition, and had usedits naval power to pressure Spain, whose colonies were dominated by slaveowners, to also make it illegal to bring new slaves into any Spanish possessions.
Spanish power in the New World was declining, however, and the government inMadrid lacked the power to enforce its will. The wealthy landowners in Cuba and elsewhere throughout the Spanish New World needed slaves to work their estates, but obeying the import restriction meant waiting for the children of existing slaves to mature. To meet the growing demand for slaves, an illegal slave trade soon emerged. Slavers went to the west coast of Africa, captured healthy young black men and women, and brought them back to Cuba for sale. Thecolonial authorities did nothing to stop this trade. In 1839, slavers broughtback a cargo of slaves from what is now Sierra Leone. Among the slaves was ayoung man they named Joseph Cinque.
In June of 1839, Jose Ruiz and Pedro Montes purchased 49 captured Africans, including Cinque, in Havana for their estates in the Cuban town of Puerto Principe. Ruiz and Montes put the slaves aboard the schooner Amistad, intending to sail from Havana up the Cuban coast to Puerto Principe. The Spanishcrew taunted the ignorant slaves, telling them wild stories, such as that their new owners intended to kill and eat them when they arrived. On the night of 1 July, Cinque led the blacks in a successful rebellion and seized controlof the ship. Several members of the crew were killed during the struggle, butRuiz and Montes survived. Cinque ordered Ruiz and Montes to take the ship back to Africa.
The Spaniards sailed east for Africa by day, but secretly reversed course bynight. For nearly two months the Amistad meandered back and forth, buteventually winds and currents drove it north to the coast of the United States. On 26 August, the U.S.S. Washington spotted the Amistad offthe coast of New York, seized the ship, and brought it into New London, Connecticut.
Cinque on Trial
In New London, Ruiz and Montes described the slave rebellion to the Americanauthorities, and pressed their claim for the return of the Amistad with its cargo of slaves. Despite the illegal capture of the slaves, the Spanishgovernment backed Ruiz's and Montes' claim. With the blessing of President Martin Van Buren's administration, District Attorney William S. Holabird charged Cinque and the other blacks with committing murder and piracy aboard the Amistad.
The trial was held in the U.S. District Court for Connecticut. The judge wasdistrict court judge Andrew T. Judson, assisted by Supreme Court Justice Smith Thompson. The abolitionists hired a team of defense lawyers to represent the blacks, comprised of Roger S. Baldwin, Joshua Leavitt, Seth Staples and theex-president of the United States, John Quincy Adams.
The trial began on 19 November 1839. The defense lawyers asserted that the blacks had the right to free themselves from the horrible conditions of slavery. In support of their position, they introduced Dr. Richard R. Madden, who had travelled extensively in Cuba and was an expert on slave conditions:
. . . so terrible were these atrocities, so murderous the system of slavery, so transcendent the evils I witnessed, over all I have ever heard or seen of the rigour of slavery elsewhere, that at first I could hardly believethe evidence of my senses.
Further, as the testimony of Madden and various witnesses made clear, returning Cinque and the others to Cuba meant certain death at the hands of the pro-slavery colonial authorities. In addition, since the blacks had originally been captured in Africa in violation of Spanish law, the abolitionists argued that the blacks were not legally slaves and therefore were not "property" belonging to Ruiz and Montes.
Despite pressure from the Van Buren administration, which wanted to avoid diplomatic tension with Spain, on 13 January 1840 Judge Judson ruled in favor ofthe Africans. Although the Amistad with its goods would be returned to Ruiz and Montes, subject to salvage costs, Cinque and the others:
. . . were born free, and ever since have been and still of right are free and not slaves.
Further, because they had been illegally enslaved, the Africans were ruled tobe innocent of murder and piracy since they had only acted to free themselves. The prosecution appealed Judson's decision to the Supreme Court. The abolitionists had anticipated this move, since five Supreme Court justices, including Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, were Southerners and had owned slaves. Thedefense relied on John Quincy Adams to present their case, banking on his prestige as much as on his legal ability.
On 22 February 1840 the Supreme Court heard both sides of the argument, and on 9 March issued its opinion. The Court upheld Judson's decision, and so theblacks were finally free. Cinque and the others were returned to Africa.
Technically, the Amistad decision did not condemn slavery. It only held that Africans who were not legally slaves could not be considered property.Still, the courts could have easily turned Cinque over to Spanish authorities or returned them to Cuba. Therefore, the case was seen as a victory for theabolitionist cause, and was a milestone in the movement's quest for the total elimination of slavery.
User Comments Add a comment…