of the said Circuit Court in this cause be, and the same is hereby affirmed, with costs and damages, at the rate of six per centum per annum. 518*] *THE UNITED STATES, Appellants, tween the United States and Spain, the same hav V. THE LIBELANTS AND CLAIMANTS OF THE SCHOONER AMISTAD, her Tackle, Ap parel, and Furniture, together with her Cargo, and the Africans mentioned and described in the several Libels and Claims, Appellees. Admiralty-salvage-capture by United States brig of Spanish vessel in possession of negroes who had been kidnapped but had revolted-construction of laws and treaties re garding slave trade-regarding pirates and robbers-ship's papers, effect of fraud-evidence. The Spanish schooner Amistad, on the 27th day of June, 1839, cleared out from Havana, in Cuba, for Puerto Principe, in the same island, having on board Captain Ferrer, and Ruiz and Montez, Spanish subjects. Captain Ferrer had on board Antonio, a slave; Ruiz had forty-nine negroes; Montez had four negroes, which were claimed by them as slaves, and stated to be their property, in passports or documents signed by the Governor-General of Cuba. In fact, these African negroes, had been, a very short time before they were put on the Amistad, brought into Cuba, by Spanish slave traders, in direct contravention of the treaties between Spain and Great Britain, and in violation of the laws of Spain. On the voyage of the Amistad, the negroes rose, killed the captain, and took possession of the vessel. They spared the lives of Ruiz and Montez, on condition that they would aid in steering the Amistad for the coast of Africa, or to some place where negro slavery was not permitted by the laws of the country. Ruiz and Montez deceived the negroes, who were totally ignorant of navigation, and steered the Amistad for the United States; and she arrived off Long Island, in the State of New York, on the 26th of August, and anchored within half a mile of the shore. Some of the negroes went on shore to procure supplies of water and provisions, and the vessel was then discovered by the United States brig Washington. Lieutenant Gedney, commanding the Washington, assisted by his officers and crew, took possession of the Amistad, and of the negroes on shore and in the vessel, brought them into the District of Connecticut, and there libeled the vessel, the cargo, and the negroes for salvage. Libels for salvage were also presented in the District Court of the United States, for the District of Connecticut, by persons who had alded, as they alleged, in capturIng the negroes on shore on Long Island, and contributed to the vessel, cargo, and negroes being taken into possession by the Brig Washington. Ruiz and Montez filed claims to the negroes as NOTE. As to salvage, when allowed and amount, etc., see note to Stratton v. Jarvis, 8 Pet. 4. Treatles, construction and operation of. An Indian treaty is as much the law of the land as a treaty with a foreign power. Turner v. Am. Bapt. Missionary Union, 5 McLean, 344. The stipulations in treatles between the United States and foreign nations, are paramount to the provisions of State constitutions. Gordon v. Kerr, 1 Wash. C. C. 322. A treaty constitutionally concluded and ratified, abrogates whatever law of any one of the States may be inconsistent therewith. 6 Op. Att'y-Gen. 291; Ware v. Hylton, 3 Dall. 199. The judicial function is to be exercised, not in the construction of treaties, but only in the interpretation of them. A court cannot alter, amend, or add to a treaty by the insertion of any clause, small or great, or dispense with any of its conditions and requirements, or take away any qualification, or integral part of any stipulation, upon any motion of equity, or general convenience, or substantial justice. The amiable Isabella, 6 Wheat. 1. The Constitution having vested the treaty-makIng power in the President and Senate, a treaty their slaves, and prayed that they, and parts of the cargo of the Amistad, might be delivered to them, or to the representatives of the crown of Spain. The attorney of the district of Connecticut filed an information stating that the Minister of Spain had claimed of the government of the United States that the vessel, cargo, and slaves should be restored, under the provisions of the treaty being arrived within the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, and had been taken possession of by a public armed vessel of the United States, under such circumstances as made it the duty of the true owners thereof. the United States to cause them to be restored to that the court would make such order as would The Information asked enable the United States to comply with the treaty: or, if it should appear that the negroes had been brought from Africa, In viola- [*519 tion of the laws of the United States, that the court would make an order for the removal of the negroes to Africa, according to the laws of the United States. A claim for Antonio was filed by tives of Captain Ferrer, and claims are also filed the Spanish consul, on behalf of the representaby merchants of Cuba for parts of the cargo of the vessel, denying salvage, and asserting their right to have the same delivered to them under the treaty. The negroes, Antonio excepted, filed an answer denying that they were slaves, or the property of Ruiz, or Montez; and denying the right of the court under the Constitution and laws of the United States to exercise any jurisdiction over their persons. They asserted that they were native free-born Africans, and ought of right to be free: that they had been, In April, 1839, kidnapped in Africa, and had been carried in a vessel engaged in the slave trade from the coast of Africa to Cuba, for the purpose of being sold; and that Ruiz and Montez, knowing these facts, had purchased them, put them on board the Amistad, intending to carry them to be held as slaves for life, to another part of Cuba, and that, on the voyage, they rose on the master took possession of the vessel and were intending to proceed to Africa or to some free State, when they were taken possession of by the United States armed vessel, the Washington. After evidence had been given by the parties, and all the documents of the vessel and cargo, with the alleged passports, and the clearance from Havana had been produce the District Court made a decree, by which all claims to salvage of the negroes were rejected, and salvage amounting to one third of the vessel and cargo was allowed to Lieutenant Gedney, and the officers and crew of the Washington. The claim of the representatives of Captain Ferrer, to Antonio, was allowed; the claims of Ruiz and Montez being included in the claim of the Spanish minister, and of the minister of Spain, to the negroes as slaves, or to have them delivered to the Spanish minister, under the treaty, to be sent to Cuba, were rejected; and the court decreed that the negroes should be delivered to the President of the United States, to be sent to Africa, pursuant to the Act of Congress of 3d March, 1819. From this decree the District Attorney of the United States appealed to the Circuit Court, except so far as the same related to Antonio. The owners of the cargo of the Amistad also appealed from that part of the decree which allowed salvage on made by that authority cannot be disregarded by the courts, in any of its provisions, unless they violate the Constitution. Doe v. Braden, 16 How. 635. The courts cannot go behind an Indian treaty, when ratified, to inquire whether or not the tribe was properly represented by its head men. Fellows v. Blacksmith, 19 How. 366. A treaty of peace abolishes the subject matter of the war, and after peace is concluded, neitber the matter in dispute, nor the conduct of either party during the war, can be revived nor brought into contest again. Ware v. Hylton, 3 Dall. 199. The judiciary cannot arrest the execution of a treaty by stopping the money designed to be paid under it in the hands of the agents of the executive. 3 Op. Att'y-Gen. 471. A government de facto cannot grant lands con. trary to a treaty by which it is bound. U. S. v. Reynes, 9 How. 127. That a reservation in a treaty may operate as grant of lands. U. S. v. Brooks, 10 How. 442. That lands granted in pursuance of a treaty stip ulation conferring mutual benefits are not to be considered as donations. Forsyth. Reynolds, 15 How. 358. their goods. Ruiz or Montez did not appeal, nor did the representatives of the owner of the Amistad. The Circuit Court of Connecticut, by a pro forma decree, affirmed the decree of the District Court reserving the question of salvage on the merchandise on board the Amistad. The United States appealed from this decree. The decree of the Circuit Court was affirmed; saving that part of the same which directed the negroes to be delivered to the President of the United States, to be sent to Africa which was reversed, and the negroes were declared to be free. ulent, they are not to be held proof of any valid The seventeenth article of the treaty [*521 with Spain which provides for certain passports and certificates as evidence of property on board of the ships of both States, is, in its terms, applicable only to cases where either of the parties is engaged in war. This article required a certain form of passport to be agreed upon by the parties and annexed to the treaty. It never was annexed; and, therefore, in the case of The Amiable Isabella, 6 Wheaton, 1, it is held inoperative. Supposing the African negroes on board the Amistad not to be slaves, but kidnapped, and free negroes, the treaty with Spain cannot be obligatory upon them; and the United States are bound to respect their rights, as much as those of Spanish ties, under suca circumstances, becomes positive and inevitable, and must be decided upon the invariable principles of justice and international law. The treaty with Spain never could have been intended to take away the equal rights of all foreignors who should assert their claims to equal justice before the courts of the United States; or to deprive such foreigners of the protection given to them by other treaties, or by the general laws of nations. The sixth article of the Treaty with Spain, of 1795, continued in full force, in this particular, by the treaty ratified in 1821, seems to have had principally in view, cases where the property of the subjects of either State had been taken possession of within the territorial jurisdiction of the other during war. The eighth article provides for cases where the shipping of the inhabitants of either State are forced, through stress of weather, pursuit of pirates, or enemies, or any other urgent necessity, to seck shelter in the ports of the other. There may well be some doubts entertained whether the case of The Amistad, in its actual circum-subjects. The conflict of rights between the parstances, falls within the purview of this article. The ninth article of the treaty provides, that all 520] ships and merchandise, which shall be rescued out of the hands of any pirates and robbers, on the high seas, which shall be brought into some port of either State, shall be delivered to the officers of the port in order to be taken care of, and "restored entire to the proprietary, as soon as due and sufficient proof shall be made concerning the property thereof." To bring the case of the Amis-❘ tad within this article, it is essential to establish: First, that the negroes, under all the circumstances, fall within the description of merchandise, In the sense of the treaty. Second. That there has been a rescue of them on the high seas, out of the hands of pirates and robbers. Third. That Ruiz and Montez are the true proprietors of the negroes, and have established their rights by competent proofs. If those negroes were, at the time, lawfully held as slaves under the laws of Spain, and recognized by those laws as property capable of being bought and sold, no reason is seen why this may not be deemed, within the Intent of the treaty, to be included under the denomination of merchandise, and ought, as such, to be restored to the claimants; for upon that point the laws of Spain would seem to furnish the proper rule of interpretation. But, admitting that to be the construction of the treaty, it is clear in the opinion of the court that neither of the other essential facts and requisites has been established by proof, and the onus proband! of both lies upon the claimants, to give rise to the casus foederis. The negroes were never the lawful slaves of Ruiz, or Montez, or of any other Spanish subject. They are natives of Africa; and were kidnapped there, and were unlawfully transported to Cuba, in violation of the laws and treaties of Spain, and of the most solemn edicts and declarations of the government. By the laws, treaties, and edicts of Spain, the African slave trade is utterly abolished; the dealing in that trade is deemed a heinous crime; and the negroes thereby introduced into the dominion of Spain are declared to be free. There is no pretense to say the negroes of the Amistad are "pirates" and "robbers:" as thev were kidnapped Africans, who, by the laws of Spain itself were entitled to their freedom. accompanying property found on board of the pri Although public documents of the government vate ships of a foreign nation are to be deemed prima facie evidence of the facts which they state. yet they are always open to be impugned for fraud; and whether that fraud be in the original obtaining of those documents, or in the subsequent fraudulent and illegal use of them, where once it is satisfactorily established, it overthrows all their sanctity, and destroys them as proof. Fraud will vitlate any, even the most solemn transactions; and any asserted title founded upon It is utterly vold. The language of the Treaty with Spain of 1795 requires the proprietor "to make due and sufficient proof" of his property; and that proof cannot be teemed either due or sufficient, which is stained ith fraud. Nothing is more clear in the laws of nations, as an established rule to regulate their rights and duties and intercourse. than the doctrine that the ship's papers are prima facie evidence of what they state; and that if they are shown to be fraud There is no ground to assert that the case of the negroes who were on board of the Amistad comes within the provisions of the Act of Congress of 1799, or of any other of the prohibitory slave trade acts. These negroes were never taken from Africa, or brought to the United States in contravention of these acts. When the Amistad arrived she was in possession of the negroes, asserting their freedom; and in no sense could possibly intend to import themselves into the United States as slaves, or for sale as slaves. The carrying of the Amistad and her cargo into Connecticut by Lieutenant Gedney, and the officers and crew of the Washington, was a highly merito rious and useful service to the proprietors of the ship and cargo, and such, as by the general princi ples of the maritime law, is always deemed a just foundation for salvage. The rate allowed by the court (one third) does not seem beyond the exercise of a sound discretion, under the very peculiar and embarrassing circumstances of the case. ON appeal from the Circuit Court of the cut. United States for the District of Connecti On the 23d day of January, 1840, Thomas R. Gedney, and Richard W. Meade, officers of the United States surveying brig Washington, on behalf of themselves and the officers and crew of the brig Washington, and of others interested and entitled, filed a libel in the District Court of the United States for the District of Connecticut, stating that off Culloden Point, near Montauck Point, they took possession of a vessel which proved to be a Spanish schooner called the Amistad, of Havana, in the island of Cuba, of about 120 tons burthen; and the said libelants found said schooner was manned by forty-five negroes, some of whom had landed near the said point for water, and there were also on board [*522 two Spanish gentlemen, who represented themselves to be, and, and as the libelants verily believe, were part owners of the cargo, and of the negroes on board, who were slaves, belonging to said Spanish gentlemen; that the schooner Amistad sailed on the 28th day of June, A. D. 1839, from the port of Havana, bound to a port in the province of Principe, both in the island of Cuba, under the command of Raymon Ferrer as master thereof; that the schooner had on board and was laden with a large and valuable cargo and provisions, to the amount in all of forty thousand dollars, and also money to the sum and amount of about two hundred and fifty dollars; and also fiftyfour slaves, to wit, fifty-one male slaves, and three young female slaves, who were worth twenty-five thousand dollars; and while on the voyage from Havana to Principe the slaves rose upon the captain and crew of the schooner, and killed and murdered the captain and one of the crew, and two more of the crew escaped and got away from the schooner; that the two Spaniards on board, to wit, Pedro Montez, and Jose Ruiz, remained alive on board the schooner after the murder of the captain, and after the negroes had taken possession of the vessel and cargo; that their lives were spared to assist in the sailing of the vessel; and it was directed by the negroes that the schooner should be navigated for the coast of Africa; and Pedro Montez, and Jose Ruiz did, accordingly, steer as thus directed and compelled by the negroes, at the peril of their lives, in the daytime, and in the night altered their course and steered for the American shore; but after two months on the ocean they succeeded in coming round Montauck Point, then they were discovered and boarded by the libelants, and the two Spanish gentlemen begged for and claimed the aid and protection of the libelants. That the schooner was accordingly taken possession of, and recaptured from the hands and possession of the negroes who had taken the same; that the schooner was brought into the port of New London, where she now is; and the schooner would with great difficulty, exposure and danger, have been taken by the libelants, but for the surprise upon the blacks who had possession thereof, a part of whom were on shore; and but for the aid and assistance and services of the libelants, the vessel and cargo would have been wholly lost to the respective owners 528*] thereof. That the cargo belongs to divers Spanish merchants and others, resident in the island of Cuba, and to Pedro Montez and Jose Ruiz, the latter owning most of the slaves. The libelants stated that having saved the schooner Amistad and cargo, and the slaves, with considerable danger, they prayed that process should be issued against the same, and that the usual proceedings might be had by the court, by which a reasonable salvage should be decreed out of the property so saved. Afterwards, Henry Green and Pelatiah Fordham, and others, filed a petition and answer to the libel, claiming salvage out of the property proceeded against by Thomas R. Gedney and others, and stating that before the Amistad was seen or boarded by the officers and crew of the Washington, they had secured a portion of the negroes who had come on shore, and had thus aided in saving the vessel and cargo. On the 29th of August, 1839, Jose Ruiz and Pedro Montez, of Cuba, filed claims to all the negroes on board of the Amistad, except Antonio, as their slaves. A part of the merchandise on board the vessel was also claimed by them. They alleged that the negroes had risen on the captain of the schooner, and had murdered him; and that afterwards they, Ruiz and Montez, had brought her into the United States. They claimed that the negroes and merchandise ought to be restored to them, under the treaty with Spain; and denied salvage to Lieutenant Gedney, and to all other persons claiming salvage. Afterwards, Ruiz and Montez each filed in the District Court a separate libel, stating more at large the circumstances of the voyage of the Amistad, the murder of the captain by the negroes, and that the negroes afterwards compelled them to steer the vessel towards Africa, but that they contrived to bring her to the coast of the United States, where she was captured by the United States brig Washington. Ruiz, in his libel, stated the negroes belonging to him to have been forty-nine in number, "named and known at Havana as follows: Antonio, Simon, Jose, Pedro, Martin, Manuel, Andreo, Edwards, Caledonia, Burtolono, Ramia, Augustin, Evaristo, Casamero, Merchoi, Gabriel. Santorion, Escolastico, Rascual, Estanislao, De sidero, Nicholas, Estevan, Tomas, Cosme, Luis Bartolo, Julian, Federico, Salustiano, *La-[*524 dislao, Celestino, Epifanio, Eduardo, Benanci co, Felepe, Francisco, Hipoleto, Berreto, Isidoro Vecente, Deconisco, Apolonio, Esequies, Leon Julio, Hipoleto, and Zenon; of whom several have died." Their present names, Ruiz stated he had been informed, were, "Cinque, Burnah 1st, Carpree, Dammah, Fourrie 1st, Shumah, Conomah, Choolay, Burnah 2d, Baah, Cabbah, Poomah, Kimbo, Peea, Bang-ye-ah, Saal, Carlee, Parale, Morrah, Yahome, Narquor, Quarto, Sesse, Con, Fourrie 2d, Kennah, Lammane, Fajanah, Faah, Yahboy, Faquannah, Berrie, Fawnu, Chockammaw, and Gabbow." The libel of Pedro Montez stated that the names of three negroes on board the Amistad, belonging to him, were Francisco, Juan, and Josepha; the Spanish name of the fourth was not mentioned; and the four were now called Teme, Mahgra, Kene, and Carria. All these were stated to be slaves, and the property of the claimants, purchased by them at Havana, where slavery is tolerated and allowed by law; and they and the merchandise on board the vessel, the claimants alleged, by the laws and usages of nations, and of the United States of America, and according to the treaties between Spain and the United States, ought to be restored to the claimants without diminution, and entire. The vessel, negroes, and merchandise wer taken into his possession by the Marshal of the District of Connecticut, under process issued by order of the court. On the 19th of September, 1837, William S. Holabird, Esq., attorney of the United States, for the district, filed a suggestion in the District Court, stating that, since the libel aforesaid, of Thomas R. Gedney, Esq., was filed in this court, viz., within the present month of September, in the year of our Lord 1839, the duly accredited minister to the United States, of Her Catholic Majesty, the Queen of Spain, had officially presented to the proper department of the United States government, a claim, which is now pending, upon the United States, setting forth that "the vessel aforesaid, called the Amistad, and her cargo aforesaid, together with certain slaves on board the said vessel, all being the same as described in the libel aforesaid, are the property of Spanish subjects, and that the said vessel, cargo, and slaves, while so being the property of the said 525] Spanish subjects, arrived within the jurisdictional limits of the United States, and were taken possession of by the said public armed brig of the United States, under such circumstances as make it the duty of the United States to cause the same vessel, cargo, and slaves, being the property of said Spanish subjects, to be restored to the true proprietors and owners of the same without further hindrance or detention, as required by the treaty now subsisting between the United States and Spain." The attorney of the United States, in behalf of the United States, prayed the court, on its being made legally to appear that the claim of the Spanish minister is well founded, and is conformable to the treaty, that the court make such order for the disposal of the said vessel, cargo, and slaves, as may best enable the United States in all respects to comply with their treaty stipulations, and preserve the public faith in viclate. But if it should be made to appear that the persons described as slaves, are negroes and persons of color, who have been transported from Africa, in violation of the laws of the United States, and brought within the United States, contrary to the same laws, the attorney, in behalf of the United States, claimed that, in such case the court will make such further order in the premises as may enable the United States, if deemed expedient, to remove such persons to the coast of Africa to be delivered there to such agent or agents as may be authorized to receive and provide for them, pursuant to the laws of the United States in such case provided, or to make such other order as to the court nay seem fit, right, and proper in the premises." pose aforesaid, made a pretended purchase of the said Carria, Teme, Kene, and Mahgra; that the pretended purchasers were made from persons who had no right whatever to the respondents or any of them, and that the same were null and void, and conferred no right or title on Ruiz or Montez, or right of control over the respondents or either of them. That on or about the 28th day of June, 1839, Ruiz and Montez, confederating with each other, and with one Ramon Ferrer, now deceased, captain of the schooner Amistad, and others of the crew thereof, caused respondents severally, without law or right, under color of certain false and fraudulent papers by them procured and fraudulently used for that purpose, to be placed by force on board the schooner to be transported with said Ruiz and Montez to some place unknown to the respondents, and there enslaved for life. That the respondents, being treated on board said vessel by said Ruiz and Montez and their confederates with great cruelty and oppression, and being of right free as aforesaid, were incited by the love of liberty natural to all men, and by the desire of returning to their families and kindred, to take possession of said vessel while navigating the high seas, as they had a right to do, with the intent to return therein to their native country, or to seek an asylum in some free State, where slavery did not exist, in order that they might enjoy their liberty under the protection of its government; that the schooner, about the 26th of August, 1839, arrived in the possession of the respondents, at Culloden Point near Montauk, and was there anchored near the shore of Long Island, within hailing distance [*527 thereof, and within the waters and territory of the State of New York; that the respondents, On the same day, September 19, 1839, the Cinque, Carlee, Dammah, Baah, Monat, Nahguis, negroes, by their counsel, filed an answer to the Quato, Con, Fajanah, Berrie, Gabbo, Fouleaa, libel of Lieutenant Gedney and others, claiming Kimbo, Faquannah, Cononia, otherwise called salvage, and to the claim of Ruiz and Montez, Ndzarbla, Yaboi, Burnah 1st, Shuma, Fawne, claiming them as slaves, as also to the inter- Peale, Ba, and Sheele, while said schooner lay vention of the United States, on the applica- at anchor as aforesaid, went on shore within tion of the minister of Spain; in which they the State of New York to procure provisions say, that they are natives of Africa, and were and other necessaries, and while there, in a born free, and ever since have been and still State where slavery is unlawful and does not of right are and ought to be free, and not exist, under the protection of the government slaves; that they were never domiciled in the and laws of said State by which they were island of Cuba, or in the dominions of the all free, whether on board of said schooner or Queen of Spain, or subject to the laws thereof. on shore, the respondents were severally seized, That on or about the 15th day of April, 1839, as well those who were on shore as aforesaid, they were, in the land of their nativity, unlaw as those who were on board of and in possesfully kidnapped, and forcibly, and wrongfully, sion of said schooner, by Lieutenant Gedney, by certain persons to them unknown, his officers, and crew of the United States brig 526*] *who were there unlawfully and piratic- Washington, without any lawful warrant or ally engaged in the slave trade between the authority whatever, at the instance of Ruiz coast of Africa and the island of Cuba, con- and Montez, with the intent to keep and secure trary to the will of these respondents, unlaw them as slaves to Ruiz and Montez, respectivefully, and under circumstances of great cruelty, ly, and obtain an award of salvage therefor, transported to the island of Cuba for the un- from this honorable court, as for a meritorious lawful purpose of being sold as slaves, and were act. That for that purpose, the respondents there illegally landed for that purpose. That were, by Lieutenant Gedney, his officers and Jose Ruiz, one of the libelants, well knowing crew, brought to the port of New London; and all the premises, and confederating with the while there, and afterwards, under the subsepersons by whom the respondents were unquent proceedings in this honorable court taken lawfully taken and holden as slaves, and in- into the custody of the marshal of said Distending to deprive the respondents severally of trict of Connecticut, and confined and held in their liberty, made a pretended purchase of the the jails in the cities of New Haven and Hartrespondents, except the said Carria, Teme, ford, respectively, as aforesaid. Wherefore, the Kene, and Mahgra; and that Pedro Montez, respondents pray that they may be set free, also well knowing all the premises, and con- as they of right are and ought to be, and federating with the said persons for the pur- that they be released from the custody of the marshal, under the process of this honorable in a perilous condition, and they were first court, under which, or under color of which brought into the port of New London, within they are holden as aforesaid. the District of Connecticut, and libeled for salvage." Jose Antonio Tellincas, and Aspe and Laca, subjects of Spain, and merchants of Cuba, presented claims for certain merchandise which was on board the Amistad when taken possession of by Lieutenant Gedney, denying all claims to salvage, and asking that the property should be restored to them. On the 23d day of January the District Judge made a decree, having taken into his consideration all the libels, claims, and the suggestion of the District Attorney of the United States, and the claim preferred by him that the ne528*] groes should be delivered to the Spanish authorities, the negroes to be sent by them to Cuba, or that the negroes should be placed under the authority of the President of the United States, to be transported to Africa. The decree rejected the claim of Green and others to salvage with costs. The claim of Lieutenant Gedney and others to salvage on the alleged slaves was dismissed. The libels and claims of Ruiz and Montez being included under the claim of the minister of Spain, were ordered to be dismissed, with costs taxed against Ruiz and Montez respectively. "That that part of the claim of the minister of Spain which demands the surrender of Cinques and others, who are specifically named in the answer filed as aforesaid, be dismissed without costs." That the claim of the vice-consul of Spain, demanding the surrender to the Spanish government of Antonio, a slave owned by the heirs of Captain Ferrer, should be sustained; and or dered that Antonio should be delivered to the government of Spain, or its agent, without costs. [The decree then proceeds to adjudge to Lieutenant Gedney and others, as salvage, one third of the gross proceeds of the vessel and cargo, according to an appraisement which had been made thereof; and, if not paid, directed the property to be sold, and that proportion of the gross proceeds of the sale to be paid over to the captors, the residue, after payment of all costs, to be paid to the respective owners of the same.] Upon the answers of the negroes, and the representations of the District Attorney of the United States, and of Montez and Ruiz, the decree proceeds: "This court having fully heard the parties appearing with their proofs, do find that the respondents, severally answering as aforesaid, are each of them natives of Africa, and were born free, and ever since have been, and still of right are free, and not slaves, as is in said sev eral libels, claims or representations, alleged or surmised; that they were never domiciled in the island of Cuba, or the dominions of the Queen of Spain, or subject to the laws thereof; that they were severally kidnapped in their native country, and were, in violation of their own rights, and of the laws of Spain, prohibiting the African slave trade, imported into the is land of Cuba, about the 12th of June, 1839, and were there unlawfully held and transferred to the said Ruiz and Montez, respectively; that said respondents were within fifteen days after their arrival at Havana, aforesaid, by said Ruiz and Montez, put on board said schooner Amistad to be transported to some port in said island of Cuba, and there unlawfully held as slaves; that the respondents, or some of them, influenced by the desire of recovering their liberty, and of returning to their families and kindred in their native country, took possession of the said schooner Amistad, killed the captain and cook, and severely wounded said Montez, while on her voyage from Havana, as aforesaid, and that the respondents arrived in possession of said schooner at Culloden Point near Montauck, and there anchored *said schoon- [*530 er on the high seas, at the distance of half a mile from the shore of Long Island, and were "And, whereas the duly accredited minister there, while a part of the respondents were, as of Spain, resident in the United States, hath, is alleged in their said answer, on shore in quest in behalf of the government of Spain, for the of water and other necessaries, and about to owners of said schooner, and the residue of sail in said schooner for the coast of Africa, said goods, claimed that the same be restored seized by said Lieutenant Gedney, and his offito that government for the said owners, they cers and crew, and brought into the port of New being Spanish subjects, under the provisions of London, in this district. And this court doth the treaty subsisting between the United further find, that it hath ever been the inten States and Spain: And, whereas it hath been tion of the said Montez and Ruiz, since the said made to appear to this court, that the said Africans were put on board the said schooner, schooner is lawfully owned by the subjects of to hold the said Africans as slaves; that at the Spain, as also the residue of said goods not time when the said Cinque and others, here specifically claimed: And, whereas the afore-making answer, were imported from Africa insaid Don Pedro Montez, and Jose Ruiz, have in to the dominions of Spain, there was a law of person ceased to prosecute their claim as speci- Spain prohibiting such importations, declaring fied in their respective libels, and their said the persons so imported to be free; that said 529*] claims fall within the demand and law was in force when the claimants took the claim of the Spanish minister, made as afore- possession of the said Africans and put them said. And, whereas the seizure of the said on board said schooner, and the same has ever schooner and goods by the said Thomas R. since been in force." Gedney and others was made on the high seas, The claims of Tellincas and Aspe and Laca, for the restoration of the goods specified by them, being part of the cargo of the Amistad, was sustained, and that the same goods be restored to them, deducting one third of the gross appraised value of them, which was allowed as salvage to the officers and crew of the Washington. A like salvage of one third of the gross value of the Amistad, and the other merchandise on board of her, was also adjudged to the salvors. The costs were to be deducted from the other two thirds. The decree of the District Court recites the |