Mutiny is the most serious of maritime crimes; an organized rebellion against a crew’s ‘leader’, punishable by death. Just the word itself sounds bad. But, in one notable case, it was truly a matter of ‘give me liberty or give me death’.
This is not the well-known Mutiny on the Bounty. It is the more important and historic events of Mutiny on the Amistad. A slave runner that hijacked persons from Africa and classified the ‘captives’ as cargo. A story intriguing enough to be made into a movie starring Anthony Hopkins and Matthew McConnaughy. With the 250th Anniversary of the United States’ independence approaching, it is a proper time to reflect on how a historical, yet horrific maritime event and Supreme Court case helped inform freedoms in the United States today.
ONE WAY OUT-MUTINY
In 1839, Portuguese slave hunters waded ashore to hunt and capture natives of Mendeland, Africa in present-day Sierra Leone. Hundreds were transported by sea to Cuba and sold into slavery. In Cuba, two Spanish plantation owners, Don Ruiz and Don Montez, purchased 53 of the captives and transported them on board a 120 foot Spanish flagged wooden schooner named La Amistad to plantations near Porto Principe in Cuba. Amistad means ‘Friendship’ in Spanish, yet this was anything but that.
On July 1, 1839, the 53 captives broke free of their chains and shackles. They killed the captain and crew, took control of the helm and ordered Ruiz and Montez to sail east towards Africa. But, Ruiz and Montez had other plans; secretly changing course toward the East Coast of the United States. On August 24th, a U.S. Navy brig WASHINGTON encountered La Amistad off Montauk, Long Island and seized it, arresting the enslaved. The vessel was taken in tow to New London, CT. Now the crew of the WASHINGTON had their own visions of monetary reward for maritime claims for salvaging the vessel, its cargo and the captives.
Under maritime law, a person who saves a ship or cargo from peril is entitled to compensation. The captain of the brig WASHINGTON claimed he and his crew rescued La Amistad from the captives with great difficulty and danger. The captain claimed that, had he and his crew not seized the vessel, there would have been a total loss to La Amistad’s “rightful” owners. The WASHINGTON’s captain therefore invoked maritime salvage rights.
The captain of the WASHINGTON filed an admiralty salvage complaint in federal court where he described the encounter with the Amistad. He estimated the value of the cargo saved at $40,000 and the captives at $25,000.
Salvage is a doctrine unique to maritime law that pre-dates the Christian era by nine hundred years as Eastern District of New York Judge Edward Korman said in the Staten Island Ferry crash salvage case. In re Complaint of The City of New York, as Owner & Operator of M/V ANDREW J. BARBERI, 534 F. Supp. 2d 370 (E.D.N.Y. 2008).
MUTINY AND NO BOUNTY
The State of Connecticut imprisoned the captives on charges of mutiny (forcible or passive resistance to lawful authority), murder and piracy. Many of them died at sea or while in jail. Mutiny at sea was a capital offense and those convicted faced capital punishment. To the captives, freedom and liberty was worth the risk.
Mutiny is treated as one of the most severe crimes. Under 10 U.S. Code § 894 – Art. 94, anyone found guilty of mutiny, attempted mutiny, sedition, or failing to report a mutiny can be punished by death or any other lawful punishment.
Connecticut Attorney Roger S. Baldwin (Matthew McCoughney’s character in the movie) represented the captives. He answered the district court complaint, stating: “…each of them are natives of Africa and were born free, and ever since have been and still of right are and ought to be free and not slaves…” The captives described their kidnap, mistreatment, and sale into slavery.
Although the charges were dismissed by the New Haven federal court, the captives remained in custody while the court determined the salvage claims. The District of Connecticut ruled that no one owned the enslaved because they had been illegally captured and transported to the United States against their free will. This was upheld by the Court of Appeals. Nonetheless, the United States Government appealed the dismissal to the Supreme Court.
The United States Supreme Court has played a central role in developing American maritime law. Complex maritime matters like Amistad were heard in federal admiralty forums as dictated by the U.S. Constitution and Federal statutes (28 USC 1333). As the late (and former maritime lawyer) Southern District Judge Charles Haight explained, in all federal courts a Silver Oar would be perched upon the bench in front of the Judge to indicate an admiralty proceeding was underway, a tradition adopted from the British Admiralty courts. See John McCarthy, The Federal Judiciary Turns 225 in Style, The Federal Lawyer (2015).
The Supreme Court’s Admiralty docket goes as far back to 1794 where the Court confirmed that federal courts have jurisdiction over disputes involving captured ships during war. The Betsey, 3 U.S. 6, 1 L. Ed. 485 (1794). Throughout the lifespan of the United States, the Supreme Court has made notable rulings such as in 1914 when a foreign shipowner (White Star Line) was sued in New York over a disaster in international waters and was permitted to maintain a proceeding here to seek to limit its liability to the post casualty value of the vessel under United States law (HMS TITANIC). Oceanic Steam Nav. Co. v. Mellor, 233 U.S. 718 (1914).
CAPITAL CHARGES LEAD TO SUPREME COURT
The Amistad case was argued in January 1841. Former President John Quincy Adams was asked to represent the captives in the Supreme Court. Adams was the sixth President of the United States, 1825 to 1829. His father John Adams was the second President and a signer of the Declaration of Independence in 1776. John Quincy Adams was the perfect candidate – a leading opponent of slavery and seasoned veteran before the Supreme Court. At first hesitant, Adams (played by Anthony Hopkins in the movie) accepted the challenge, as he described in a letter to attorney Robert S. Baldwin:
My reluctance was founded entirely and exclusively upon the consciousness of my own incompetency to do justice to their cause. In every other point of view there is in my estimation no higher object upon earth of ambition than to occupy that position [to be the attorney for the captives].
See Letter from John Quincy Adams to Roger S. Baldwin dated November 11, 1840.
Adams argued for nine hours passionately defending the captives’ rights to freedom on moral grounds, stating that “I know of no law, statute, or constitution, no code, no treaty applicable to the proceedings of the Executive or the Judiciary, except THAT law (pointing to a copy of the Declaration of Independence hanging on one of the pillars in the court room). See Argument of John Quincy Adams, before the Supreme Court, p. 8, Smithsonian Institution Transcription Center, National Museum of African American History and Culture.
The U.S. Attorney argued treaty obligations required the captives to be returned to Spain. Adams argued American ideals of freedom demanded the captives be freed and returned home to Africa.
The Supreme Court ruled 7-1 on the side of the Africans, freeing them all immediately.
Senior Justice Joseph Story delivered the Court’s decision on March 9, 1841 stating that the captives were “unlawfully kidnapped, and forcibly and wrongfully carried on board a certain vessel” and had never been legal property. The Court concluded:
[T]he said [captives] be declared to be free, and be dismissed from the custody of the court, and go without delay…it was the ultimate right of all human beings in extreme cases to resist oppression, and to apply force against ruinous injustice.”
The Supreme Court affirmed the District Court’s salvage award to the Captain of the WASHINGTON for cargo and the vessel for having performed “a highly meritorious and useful service to the proprietors of the ship and cargo.” The Amistad, 40 U.S. 518, 597 (1841).
Once again, the Supreme Court took a deep dive into a maritime case that remains seeworthy to this day. As it turned out, President John Quincy Adams was the right man at the right time to right the wrong and let freedom ring again for the captives of the Amistad. Adams knew firsthand and from his father’s signature, the true meaning of a Declaration of Independence…that “all are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”. After 250 years, we still hold these truths to be self-evident!
JAMES MERCANTE is Maritime partner at Gallo Vitucci Klar, LLP. He is President of the Board of Commissioners of Pilots of the State of New York and US Navy Captain (Retired). JOANNA M. GRILLO, Maritime associate at Gallo Vitucci Klar, assisted in the preparation of this article