|
Summary: Benjamin Gerhard writes lawyer Theodore Sedgwick about his role in the Amistad case. Mr. Gerhard expresses his happiness that Mr. Sedgwick is representing the Africans and gives him news about the payment of the last commission. “Alas the poor Africans! I am glad you have been retained from them- so you have gained a cause.”
[Theodore Sedgwick, Jr.]. Benjamin Gerhard. Autograph Letter Signed “B. Gerhard”, to Theodore Sedgwick. Philadelphia, PA, September 14, 1839. 8 x 5 ½”. 1 p.
Inventory# 21456 $1,500
“Alas the poor Africans! I am glad you have been retained from them- so you have gained a cause. I annex a receipt for the costs of the last commission – to enable you to tax them. The other commission has been partly executed and will be dispatched early in the week.”
Historical Background: The Amistad (meaning “friendship” in Spanish), a Spanish vessel, was transporting fifty-three slaves from Africa in June and July 1839. Near Cuba, the Africans rebelled and managed to gain control the ship. But they were detained by the U.S. Navy near Long Island on August 26, 1839. The Africans were apprehended, taken to Connecticut, and made to endure a long legal battle over their legal status. In 1841, the case ultimately reached the Supreme Court, where former President John Quincy Adams argued on the Africans’ behalf. The Court ruled that the Africans were never legally slaves and, thus, should be returned to their homeland. The thirty-six surviving Africans did return to Africa in 1842.
Theodore Sedgwick, a New York lawyer, was appointed attaché to Paris and later District Attorney of the southern district of New York, and was one of the Africans’ defense attorneys.
Benjamin Gerhard was a Philadelphia lawyer who was appointed provost-marshal of his home city during the Civil War.
Condition: The letter is in fine condition, though the top half of the sheet has been removed, clear of the complete text.
The following is provided as additional historic background on Sedgwick and the Amistad case. It is copied from:
http://amistad.mysticseaport.org/library/diplomacy/doc.185.40.html
Messrs. Staples and Sedgwick to the President, 13 September, 1839." U.S. Congress. House. Africans Taken in the Amistad. 26th Congress., 1st sess., 1840.H. Doc. 185.
Messrs. Staples and Sedgwick to the President of the United States.
Transcript:
NEW YORK, September 13, 1839.
SIR: We have been engaged as counsel of the Africans brought in by the Spanish vessel, the Amistad; and, in that capacity, take the liberty of addressing you this letter.
These Africans are now under indictment in the circuit court of the second circuit on a charge of piracy, and their defence to this accusation must be established before that tribunal. But we are given to understand, from authority not to be doubted, that a demand has already been made upon the Federal Government, by the Spanish minister, that these negroes be surrendered to the authorities of his country; and it is on this account that we now address you.
We are also informed that these slaves are claimed under the 9th article of the treaty of 1795, between this country and Spain, by which all ships and merchandise rescued out of the hands of pirates and robbers on the high seas are to be restored to the true proprietor, upon due and sufficient proof. [63]
We now apply to you, sir, for the purpose of requesting that no order may be made by the Executive until the facts necessary to authorize its interposition are established by the judicial authority in the ordinary course of justice. We submit that this is the true construction of the treaty; that it is not a mere matter of Executive discretion; but that, before the Government enforces the demand of the Spanish claimant, that demand must be substantiated in a court of justice.
It appears to us manifest that the treaty could never have meant to have submitted conflicting rights of property to mere official discretion, but that it was intended to subject them to the same tribunals which, in all other cases, guard and maintain our civil rights. Reference to the 7th article, in our opinion, will confirm this position.
It will be recollected that, if we adopt this as the true construction of the treaty, should any occasion ever arise when our citizens shall claim the benefit of this section, Spain would be at liberty to give it the same interpretation; and that the rights of our citizens will be subjected to the control of subordinate ministeria1 agents, without any of those safeguards which courts of justice present for the establishment of truth and the maintenance of rights. We submit, further, that it never could be intended that the Executive of the Union should be harassed by the investigation of claims of this nature, and yet, assuredly, if the construction contended for be correct, such must be the result; for, if he is to issue the order upon due and sufficient proof, the proof must be sufficient to his mind.
We further submit that, in regard to the Executive, there are no rules of evidence nor course of proceeding established; and that, in all such cases, unless the claimant be directed to the courts of justice, the conduct of the affair must, of necessity, be uncertain, vague, and not such as is calculated to inspire confidence in the public or the parties. We can find nothing in the treaty to warrant the delivery of these individuals as offenders; and the Executive of the Union has never thought itself obliged, under the law of nations, to accede to demands of this nature.
These suggestions are of great force in this case, because we, with great confidence, assert, that neither according to the law of this, nor that of their own country, can the pretended owners of these Africans establish any legal title to them as slaves.
These negroes were, it is admitted, carried into Cuba, contrary to the provsions of the treaty between Spain and Great Britain of 1817, and of the orders made in conformity therewith; orders which have been repeated, at different times, to as late a date as the 4th November, 1838, by which the trade is expressly prohibited; and if they had been taken on board the slaver, they would have been unquestionably emancipated.
They were bought by the present claimants, Messrs. Ruiz and Montes, either directly from the slaver, or under circumstances which must, beyond doubt, have apprized them that they were illegally introduced into the Havana; and on this state of facts we, with great respect, insist that the purchasers of Africans illegally introduced into the dependencies of a country which has prohibited the slave trade, and who make the purchase with knowledge of this fact, can acquire no right. We put the matter on the Spanish law; and we affirm that Messrs. Ruiz and Montes have no title, under that law, to these Africans. [64]
If this be so, then these negroes have only obeyed the dictates of self-defence. They have liberated themselves from illegal restraint, and it is superfluous to say that Messrs. Ruiz and Montes have no claim whatever under the treaty.
It is this question, sir, fraught with the deepest interest, that we pray you to submit for adjudication to the tribunals of the land. It is this question that we pray may not be decided in the recesses of the cabinet, where these unfriended men can have no counsel and can produce no proof, but in the halls of Justice, with the safeguards that she throws around the unfriended and the oppressed.
And, sir, if you should not be satisfied with the considerations here presented, we then submit that we are contending for a right upon a construction of a treaty; that this point, at least, should be presented to the courts of justice; and, should you decide to grant an order surrendering these Africans, we beg that you will direct such notice of it to be given, as may enable us to test the question as we shall be advised, by habeas corpus or otherwise.
We have only, sir, to add, that we have perfect confidence that you will decide in this matter with a single regard to the interests of justice and the honor of the country, and that we are, with the greatest respect, your most obedient servants,
SETH P. STAPLES.
THEODORE SEDGWICK, JR.
MARTIN VAN BUREN, Esq.,
President of the United States.
|
