Snediker, Quentin, "Searching for the Historic
Amistad." The Log of Mystic Seaport, 49:4 (Spring 1998): 107-108.Searching for the Historic Amistad
Quentin Snediker
The idea to build a recreation of the historic schooner Amistad is not a new one here at Mystic Seaport. As early as 1989, our Development Department and Shipyard staff began discussions with Amistad Affiliates, a small, not-for-profit group based in Cottage Valley, New York, about the feasibility of such an undertaking. During occasional meetings over the next several years, we explored the potentials and possibilities for bringing this idea to fruition.
Most Americans were not familiar with the story of the Amistad before the release of the Steven Spielberg film, but many concerned with the issue of human rights viewed the Amistad incident as an icon representing the struggle for equality for all Americans. The project of recreating this schooner carries with it not only the responsibility to build a strong and safe vessel, but to honor the legacy of that icon.
Amistad Affiliates was founded in 1988 by Warren Quincy Marr II, former editor of the NAACP publication Crisis. Warren has had a lifelong involvement with the Amistad and its legacy. In the late 1960s, while employed by the American Missionary Association, he helped found the Amistad Research Center, then at Fisk University, now located on the campus of Tulane University in New Orleans. The American Missionary Association was the successor organization to the original Amistad Committee, the group of abolitionists, led by Lewis Tappan, who rallied to support the Amistad captives in their legal struggle in 1839. The Amistad Research Center has grown to be the largest collection of human-rights-related manuscript materials in the world, now holding more than 10,000,000 documents.
In anticipation of the 150th anniversary of the Amistad incident, several groups of Connecticut citizens rallied to promote awareness of this important event in our history. Principal among these groups were the New Haven- based Connecticut Afro-American Historical Society, founded in 1971, and a new Amistad Committee, founded in 1988. Together, these two organization led a campaign to create a monument honoring the Amistad incident. This monument now stands in front of the New Haven City Hall, the very site of the prison in which the captives were incarcerated during their trials. Events surrounding the dedication of this monument brought representatives of Mystic Seaport, the Connecticut Afro-American Historical Society, the Amistad Committee, Amistad Affiliates, and then-Governor Lowell Weicker together. The discussion immediately turned to the question: Why not build a recreation of the Amistad ? Finally, a great idea's time had come.
With their combined skills and experience, these groups provide the foundation necessary to guarantee the project's success. Amistad Affiliates brings a direct connection to the legacy of the Amistad through Warren Marr and the Amistad Research Center; the Connecticut Afro-American Historical Society brings 25 years of commitment to teaching about the contribution of Connecticut citizens of African descent to the common history; the Amistad Committee brings representatives of the New Haven educational and spiritual community; and Mystic Seaport brings shipbuilding skill and a commitment to preserving and telling the story of all Americans and the sea.
In 1994 the Connecticut Department of Economic and Community Development provided a planning grant to begin research into the historic character of the vessel and to develop an operational plan for the vessel once she was built.
In 1996 these four groups incorporated as a consortium under the name Amistad America, Inc. This new organization's mission is to teach the lessons of history, cooperation, and leadership that are illustrated by the Amistad incident through the ownership and operation of the new schooner Amistad.
Last fall, as a result of Amistad America, Inc.’s having raised the necessary matching funds committed for the vessel's operation from donors such as Phoenix Home Life Mutual Insurance Company and other Connecticut corporations, the State of Connecticut made a commitment to a $2,500,000 bond for construction of an Amistad recreation. With the necessary resources now in place to see this project become a reality, construction was scheduled to begin on 8 March 1998.
The Search
We set out to answer several fundamental questions, and in the process uncovered many useful details about the vessel's appearance and her history. Beginning with a thorough examination of secondary resource material, our search grew to include innumerable other resources, including contemporary newspaper accounts, government records, court documents, and manuscript collections. In Connecticut, the collections of the New Haven Colony Historical Society, the Sterling Memorial Library and Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library at Yale University, and the New London County Historical Society were especially fruitful. Other repositories searched included the National Archives, Library of Congress, New York Public Library, Schomberg Center for Research in Black Culture, and many additional institutions.
The African captives’ struggle for freedom, and how that struggle related to the increasingly polarized views on slavery in the nation at that time, immediately became the focus of international media attention in 1839. The vessel itself rapidly became a footnote to this more dramatic story of the captives’ plight. In 1839, vessels like Amistad were a common sight all around the “Atlantic world”; consequently, the schooner itself received little notice. Our project provided the first opportunity for a strictly maritime approach to research into the Amistad's history and would, we hoped, deepen our knowledge of the schooner.
What Did the Amistad Look Like?
In the most comprehensive recent book on the incident, the 1989 Mutiny on the Amistad, Howard Jones came to the same conclusions as had all earlier works. The schooner Amistad had been built in Baltimore under the name “Friendship,” sold to owners in the Spanish colony of Cuba, and renamed Amistad. At the time of the incident, the vessel was thought to be about six years old. This was a logical conclusion from the evidence at hand and would be a typical scenario for the time. Baltimore had a strong presence in the trade with Cuba, and many small coasters were built there, operated for several years under the U.S. flag, and then sold to foreign owners. Little was said about the Amistad's size, the details of her appearance, or what became of the vessel after the court trials. Generally all modern writers had agreed with the New York Morning Herald report of 30 August 1839: “She is a Baltimore built vessel of matchless model for speed, about 120 tons burden and about six years old.”1
This general description is borne out by the one known graphic image of the Amistad, a watercolor painting in the collections of the New Haven Colony Historical Society. The painting depicts the Amistad at anchor off Culloden Point, Long Island, New York, about four miles west of Montauk Point. It represents the scene as the “public armed vessel Washington ”2 approached to investigate before taking the Amistad and its captives into custody. In the right foreground some of the Africans are shown ashore trading, presumably with Captain Green, a Sag Harbor whaling master who was out gunning when he and his party came upon the captives. Green later filed a claim for salvage against Amistad and her “cargo” in Connecticut District Court. On the horizon, the brig Washington approaches the anchored Amistad.
This painting was owned by Roger Sherman Baldwin, principal attorney for the Amistad Africans, and it was donated to the Historical Society by his son in 1899. The unidentified artist demonstrated a working knowledge of this type of vessel. Sails, standing rig, running gear leads, and other technical details are accurately portrayed for a topsail schooner of the period. The question remains, however: Does the painting truly depict the Amistad or simply a generic schooner of her type?
As the Amistad worked her way north into the waters of the New York Bight in August 1839, she came in contact with several vessels plying these waters. As early as 8 August 1839 the first reference to the mutiny by a group of “slaves” aboard a Spanish coaster on the coast of Cuba was reported in the New York newspapers.3 From that time on she began to excite public attention, being labeled “a suspicious vessel” and “the long low black schooner.” The schooner was first positively identified by Captain Sears of the schooner Eveline, bound from New Bedford for Philadelphia. Captain Sears boarded the schooner about 70 miles east of Egg Harbor, New Jersey, on 19 August and reported his findings at Wilmington, Delaware. He described the mysterious schooner as “a long sharp schooner of about 80 tons, with painted green bottom, one white streak, top black, and tops'l yard gone. . . . On her stern L’Amistad—trunk cabin—no cabin windows—flush deck—spread eagle for a figure head—copper bottom—clams above copper—kettles for cooking set in brick work on the deck.”4
This “seaman's eye view” of the Amistad proved invaluable to our research. Close examination of the painting reveals a full spread-eagle figurehead, lending credibility to the image for research purposes. Captain Sears’ evaluation of her size proves more accurate than most other sources as well.
Over the next several days the New York papers reported an increasing number of encounters with the mysterious vessel by New York pilot boats, including the Lafayette, whose captain reported to the papers “a Baltimore built schooner, painted black with a green bottom, and the appearance of having been at sea about three months. She had two long topmasts, and on her stern two gilt stars.”5 From these sources a reasonable idea as to the vessel's appearance begins to emerge, but several important questions remained.
How Big Was the Amistad ?
Our most important task in formulating the design for this recreation of the Amistad was to determine her size. As seen above, there was conflicting information about the Amistad's size. Most newspaper references describe her as about 120 tons—one even refers to her as 180 tons; yet Captain Sears reports her as about 80 tons. Clearly her size needed to be verified before we could proceed.
The first hard evidence about the size of the Amistad, including dimensions, came with the discovery of a Temporary Registry for the schooner Ion, ex-Amistad. While doing research at the National Archives Branch Depository in Waltham, Massachusetts, Warren Marr discovered this document in the New London customs records housed there. This document was issued on 2 June 1841 to declare that George Howland of Newport, Rhode Island was the sole owner of the vessel Ion, “formerly the Spanish schooner Amistad, sold by the order of the United States Court and has been nationalized by an act of Congress.”
It further described the Amistad as a having “one deck and two masts, her length is sixty-four feet, her breadth nineteen feet and nine inches, her depth six feet and six inches, and that she measures Seventy and 46/95 tons, that she is a schooner, has a square stern, no galleries and an eagle head.”6 This document provides irrefutable evidence regarding her physical appearance, and, therefore, may be the single most important document related to our search.
The dimensions given in this document derive from an admeasurement survey conducted by John French, surveyor for the Port of New London. These measurements were taken at specific places aboard a vessel as designated by law. They are then used to calculate “tonnage,” which was not a measurement of weight but volume, where one ton measures 95 cubic feet of space. This volume measurement is an expression of cargo capacity, and is the basis for licensing and port fees levied against a vessel. By referring to the tonnage laws in effect for 1841 to establish these known points of measurement, we finally have a true picture of the Amistad's size. Allowing for appropriate overhang due to the rake of stem and stern, the historic Amistad was approximately 72 feet long measured over the rail. The beam (width) as measured at the widest point on the vessel was 19 feet, nine inches. The depth of hold of six feet, six inches was measured from the underside of the deck planks above to the surface of the ceiling (inner planking) in the hold. Allowing for sufficient depth of keel and deadwood, her light draft would have been approximately nine feet.7
This evidence reveals that the Amistad was really quite a small vessel, far smaller than we might have thought from popular description by modern writers or the impression given by the painting. It is easy to speculate as to how this misunderstanding arose. Contemporary media portrayed the Amistad captives’ uprising as a larger-than-life event. One reporter facetiously wrote about the increasing exaggeration of the vessel's ferocity: “It is reported she has three tons of money on board, and that the blacks have now three cannon. . . . In a week hence, if not captured in the meantime, this slaver will be increased to a formidable piratical vessel, with one hundred men and ‘fixens’ to match.”8 As the ferocity of the Amistad's appearance became intensified by news reports, not surprisingly, the vessel's dimensions likewise grew in the public's perception. More practically however, Baltimore-style schooners carried large sail plans relative to other vessels of their time. To a lay observer this might convey the appearance of a larger vessel than actual measurement might reveal. It is easier still to understand the painting's representation of size relative to the human figures depicted on board. Frequently in ship portraiture, the size of a vessel is exaggerated either relatively larger or smaller by the hand of naive artists as they interpret their observations.
Where Was the Amistad Built?
Contemporary newspaper accounts describe the Amistad as “built in Baltimore” or “built on the Baltimore model.” This might appear a straightforward statement as to the vessel's origin. To those more familiar with the history of this style of craft, however, these statements are inconclusive.
“Baltimore model” craft or “sharp built” vessels, later referred to as “Baltimore Clippers,” originally appeared on the waters of the lower Chesapeake Bay in the late eighteenth century. In the early nineteenth century, as the shipbuilding industry became more established in Baltimore, these vessels came to be identified with that port. Their success as privateers during the War of 1812 brought international recognition to these vessels and their builders.
Characterized by low freeboard, with large sail area hung on tall, light, raking spars, these schooners and brigs were noted for their speed and weatherliness. As a result, they were sought after for any trade where speed and handiness were more desirable than capacity. This of course included illicit trades, which after 1808 included the slave trade. By 1839 Baltimore-model vessels were almost a standard design, and were so successful at their trades that they were often copied by builders in other American ports, and eventually in other nations.9
If, indeed, the Amistad had been built in Baltimore, there would be evidence of her original construction in the customs records for the port of Baltimore or other nearby ports. Further, if she had been built in the U.S. and sold to owners in the Spanish colony of Cuba, there should be evidence of this transaction in both customs records for her original port of registry and in correspondence between the U.S. consul in Cuba and the U.S. State Department. Both of these resources are housed in the National Archives in Washington, D.C.
Our search began in these records from the year 1820. Since the average life expectancy for a schooner of that era was about eight to ten years, this would preclude the likelihood of an earlier date of construction. Consular correspondence was scoured for record of a schooner of the above description and admeasurement dimensions, possibly named Friendship, calling at and being sold in a Cuban port. Between 1820 and 1839, 110 schooners under 120 tons burden were sold from U.S. ports to foreign owners in Cuba. None were named Friendship; although several were tantalizingly close in tonnage measurement, but no clear match was found. Similarly, an exhaustive study at the National Archives in Washington, D.C., of abstracts of registry and enrollments and surviving master carpenter certificates for all customs districts between Wilmington, North Carolina, and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, yielded no definitive match.
As we examined these customs records, the search into contemporary newspaper accounts of the Amistad incident continued. In most cities, as mentioned above, the vessel became a footnote, scarcely mentioned as the debate over the status of the Africans heated up. One notable exception, however, was the Baltimore Sun, which published a small article dealing specifically with the origin of the vessel itself. The article reported a conversation with Norris Willcox, U.S. Marshal for the District of Connecticut, the man charged with the responsibility for the care and keeping of the vessel and her cargo while both were under court authority. The article states: “N. Willcox, Esq., the Marshall; here said that the schooner could not be American built as she was very different from vessels built in this country for the slave trade. She is only about 65 or 80 tons burden, and her decks are made of mahogany.”10
This statement about mahogany decks is particularly important. Today, mahogany is commonly used in wooden-boatbuilding, but in the 1830s it was an exotic and expensive wood. Surely a small, American-built coastal schooner was highly unlikely to have been built with such expensive imported wood. In Cuba, however, this wood was abundant, as commonly available and used as was white oak in the U.S.
Two other sources corroborate this thinking regarding the schooner's Cuban origin. First, the Congressional debate over the nationalization of the Amistad referred to the schooner as “having been built abroad,” but cited no country of origin. Second, Niles’ Weekly Register for 31 October 1840, noting the sale of the Amistad, stated, “She is of some 50 or 60 tons burden, built in Cuba, and is said to be old.”11
That the Baltimore Sun took such a strong interest in the origin of the schooner is not surprising. In 1820, federal law strengthened provisions of the legislation that terminated importation of slaves into the U.S. after 1 January 1808. The 1819 legislation equated slavery with piracy and prohibited American citizens from supplying vessels or fitting out vessels for that infamous trade. Baltimore builders had enjoyed a lucrative business constructing their fast, weatherly schooners for this trade. Some continued despite this prohibition; others moved to Havana to continue building these specialized craft. At the time of the Amistad incident, two prominent Baltimore shipbuilders were under indictment by the federal government for complicity in the trade by supplying and fitting out such schooners. It is easy to speculate that Baltimore had an interest in proving that the Amistad, caught with illegal Africans aboard, was not a product of that port's industry.12
These references taken together clearly indicate that the schooner was not of American origin as popularly held, but was built in Cuba. The Baltimore-model design influence is easily traced to the strong presence of these vessels in the Caribbean trade, and to the migration of Baltimore builders to Cuba after 1820.
Evidence uncovered later further corroborates this finding, and provides many additional details. Calvin Lane, an exhibit interpreter at Mystic Seaport, made an invaluable discovery. In 1866, Captain George Howland compiled an autobiography now housed in the Rhode Island Historical Society. Having purchased the Amistad in 1841, Howland described the schooner as having been built in Cuba as a pirate ship before entering legitimate coasting trade. He described her as “a sharp clipper, built of West India hard wood, her deck and bottom plank of red Spanish cedar, her sides of mahogany and strongly copper fastened and coppered.”13 Once again, these materials confirm the vessel's foreign origin and provide further details of her construction.
Was the Amistad a Slave Ship?
The Amistad was a licensed Spanish coastal trader operating on the north coast of the island of Cuba. Like literally thousands of other similar craft operating in that era, she did the work that tractor trailer trucks do for us today, hauling every commodity of household life. Occasionally, such coastal traders carried enslaved people from one port to another. In the same period there were of course middle-passage slave ships with all of the unimaginable horror associated with this “trade.” The Portuguese brig Tecora, which carried many of the 53 Amistad captives and approximately 400 other individuals across the Atlantic from Sierra Leone to Havana, was such a vessel.
The Amistad was owned by her master, Captain Ramón Ferrer, and sailed from her home port of Guanaja, the port city of the province of Principe in northeastern Cuba. In his testimony before the district court, Antonio, the 14-year-old slave to Captain Ferrar and cabin boy aboard the Amistad, provided information about the vessel's operation. Antonio had been aboard for about three years. He reported that the vessel operated between Principe and Havana on an irregular schedule, making a round voyage approximately every two months. She usually carried general cargo, but occasionally she transported captives bound for enslavement on the sugar plantations in that province.
The nature of her trade is evidenced by an advertisement taken by Captain Ferrer in the Havana newspaper Noticioso Y Lucero, announcing the very voyage that was to carry the Amistad to international attention. In this notice, Captain Ferrer sought passengers and cargo bound for his home port. The ad ran daily for a week prior to her sailing on 28 June 1839. This ad demonstrates the legitimate trade in which the Amistad was normally engaged, and that carrying enslaved people was incidental to this trade.
Captain Ferrer was successful in securing a cargo. When the Amistad departed Havana at about 4:00 P.M. on 28 June, she carried many tons of mixed cargo, including cloth, manufactured goods, crockery, foodstuffs, and hundreds of other items, including two cases of sugarcane knives or machetes.14
The Amistad did possess “kettles for cooking set in a brick,” sweeps—long oars for rowing when becalmed—and a large midships hatch, all features commonly found aboard slave ships. There is, however, no indication from any source that she was fitted with “slave shelves,” the half-deck “accommodations” for slaves which helped create the unbearably cramped and unsanitary conditions found aboard true slave ships. While aboard the Amistad, the captives were divided into two groups. About half were confined below, and the others were “held” on deck. While there is no doubt that the Amistad engaged in carrying enslaved people on this voyage and many others, to call the Amistad a “slave ship” is to oversimplify the issue, and risk misunderstanding the complex nature of the dependence of the global economy on slave labor through the middle of the nineteenth century.
Why Did the Court Case Unfold in Connecticut?
Various researchers have speculated on the decision of Lieutenant Gedney, commander of the USS Washington, to tow the Amistad to New London. Wouldn't a port on Long Island, such as Sag Harbor, have been a more logical choice?
Modern chroniclers of the event propose that Gedney chose New London to gain a favorable position for his salvage claim, which included the “value” of the captives as slaves. These writers note that slavery was not entirely abolished by law in Connecticut until 1848, but had been abolished in New York in 1797. However, Connecticut had prohibited the importation of slaves as early as 1774, legislated freedom for all Connecticut slaves born after 1784 upon their twenty-fifth birthday, and in 1788 prohibited Connecticut residents from engaging in the slave trade. By 1830, 23 individuals born before 1784 remained enslaved in Connecticut due to the state's system of gradual manumission, but with more than 8,000 free blacks Connecticut was not a slave state.15 More importantly, whether tried in New York or Connecticut, the case fell under federal jurisdiction and therefore federal law would apply, not the legal status of slavery in a particular state.
If we interpret Gedney's decision from the maritime perspective, New London becomes the obvious choice. First, New London was theWashington's base of operations for the summer of 1839. She called there frequently as she went about her survey duties in eastern Long Island Sound, and her master was familiar with its geography, customhouse, and the support found there. More influential in his decision, however, would have been wind and tide.
On 26 August 1839, as theWashington took Amistad, the wind was light from the southwest, going to south, and the sea was calm. Late in the afternoon the tide was about to start to ebb, flowing out of the Sound to the east. Sag Harbor lay up to weather and the westward about 18 miles, New London to leeward about 10 miles. Whether to tow the schooner with an unstable crew of 41 Africans against the tide in confined and shallow Gardiner's Bay, or to run downwind in open, deep water back to home port is not a hard decision—-the choice of New London is obvious.16
What Ever Happened to the Amistad?
Arriving in New London Harbor well after dark, the Amistad was anchored under the guns of Fort Trumbull, “within musket shot of theWashington.” After District Court Judge Andrew T. Judson held an initial hearing aboard theWashington, the captives were charged with murder and piracy and the vessel and her cargo were libeled for salvage by Lieutenant Gedney. The captives were ordered to New Haven for trial. Cinqué was separated from the other captives and put on board the Revenue CutterWolcott in chains. The other captives were put aboard the sloop Plume, and the two vessel sailed in company for New Haven. The Amistad was then shifted to Lawrence's Wharf, located just south of the customhouse, where she remained for a year, accumulating a wharfage fee of 50 cents a day.17
In September 1840, Marshal Willcox petitioned the District Court to allow him to auction the vessel and her cargo, stating the schooner was “in a perishable and ruinous condition, said schooner needing extensive and immediate repair to keep her afloat, and said goods [needed] constant attention to preserve them from a total loss and unless said schooner and said goods are disposed of they will soon be of no avail to anyone.”18 The court granted this permission and, after being duly advertised, the sale took place on 15 October 1840. The winning bidder was Captain George Howland of Newport, Rhode Island.
Howland paid the extremely low price of $245 for the schooner. Most potential buyers rightly believed that it would be difficult or even impossible under federal vessel-registration law to register this foreign-built vessel. Consequently, the Amistad was sold “at about her value to break up.” Once Howland had a chance to examine his purchase and evaluate her condition he decided “she was too valuable to break up, hence the cost, delay and struggle to get an American register.”
Federal law permitted foreign-built vessels to be registered under the U.S. flag for only two reasons: forfeiture for breach of U.S. law, or legal seizure as a prize in wartime. Because the Amistad did not fit either of these criteria, it would require an act of Congress to grant her U.S. registry. Frustrated in his initial attempts, Howland sold the vessel to a Mr. Cottrell, who offered to petition Congress and then sell the vessel back to Captain Howland. According to Howland's manuscript, Cottrell solicited the assistance of John Quincy Adams, who succeeded in obtaining a positive result. The Congressional Globe, however, records that this successful petition was presented by a Mr. Clark, and that the issue had to be brought before Congress three times before it could be heard. This occurred at the same time that the case of the Amistad captives was being heard in the Supreme Court chamber in the basement of the Capitol, and the national polarization over the issue of the Amistad and its implications for the broader debate over slavery found focus in the petition for registry. To pro-slavery interests in the House of Representatives, granting a registry would imply support for the Africans’ position. On the third attempt Clark pointed out that the vessel was sold at the direction of the District Court, and a U.S. citizen who had purchased the vessel in good faith was being harmed by this delay. Finally, on 3 March 1841—-six days before the freedom of the Amistad captives was upheld by the Supreme Court—-the 26th Congress authorized the enrollment or registry of the schooner Amistad.19
On 2 June 1841 Howland received a temporary registry for his vessel from the New London customhouse. He recalled: “I gave her the name Ion, attained a register and sailed to Newport, six months from the time I bought her after being subjected to much trouble and expense.” After arriving in Newport on 4 June, Howland set about refitting his new vessel. “I repaired and painted the Amistad, aliasIon and gave her a new suit of sails, rigging, blocks, etc. and in the fall loaded for Havana.”
We are fortunate to have a glimpse into the actual sailing qualities of the Amistad, now Ion, in Howland's own words.20 He departed Newport on 5 November 1841 for a passage that was to prove a real test for the little schooner's abilities. “On the sixth had a furious N.W. gale and scud before it, our little clipper flying over the seas behaving well, but alas she sprung a leak,” Howland wrote. Unable to stop the leak, and exhausted from pumping, Howland altered course for Bermuda, arriving there in 80 hours from Newport. “Great sailing this—I much doubt if ever a vessel made a shorter passage,” he noted. After repairing the vessel, and unable to sell his cargo at Bermuda, he gave up on Havana and decided to head for St. Thomas, arriving there ten days later.
Delay and the effects of bilge water on his perishable cargo of onions, apples, live poultry, and cheese were devastating. Howland estimated his loss at $1,200 on this outbound cargo. His troubles were further compounded by the crew. The mate proved to be “a drunken good for nothing villain who gave me much trouble” and his cook was caught selling ship's stores, cargo, and the schooner's boat.
Short of funds, Howland purchased some pig iron as ballast and sought a paying cargo for his speedy schooner. “After laying here for some time I engaged ‘full freight’ of rice out of a Charleston vessel to carry to Point a Petre, Guadalupe [sic] for $200.”
The passage from St. Thomas to Guadeloupe was again a swift one, “beating the regular packet by 24 hours.” On his arrival Howland was offered a good price for the Amistad, but finding a strong demand for rice, tobacco, and other items, he agreed to sell her only after making a trip to Charleston. He agreed to a price of $2,600, and a bill of sale was drawn up. Howland then purchased 200,000 oranges and sailed for Charleston “beating their best pilot boat schooner going in.”
Despite another quick passage Howland found the market “glutted with Havana oranges.” He managed to clear a small profit despite losing “60,000 rotted. . . about common for so large a cargo stowed in bulk” and paying a 20-percent duty. Howland purchased a cargo of tobacco, rice, pork, beef, pickled and smoked herring, lard, hams, codfish, and pickled salmon. He arranged a deck cargo of tongue-and-groove floorboards, shingles, and barrel staves, as well as “a spare sail boat.” He also shipped a new crew, sailing on 12 February 1842 for Pointe-à-Pitre.
Hard luck was to follow Howland on this passage as well. “From the 14 to the 18 we had a tremendous gale, and on the 17 a furious hurricane wind.” At 10:00 P.M. on the seventeenth “a high sea swept in broadside and knocked her over on her beam ends, rushed aft and washed me from the helm overboard and clear of the vessel. The crutch rope struck my hand and I clung to it as her stern settled in the sea, I hauled myself on board, clutched the helm, put it hard up and as a sea rolled under her counter she righted up and I was scudding before it again before she had lost her headway.”
As the gale continued, Howland, fearing the worst, cut away the deck cargo. “In less than a minute, I had a clean deck, the sea had washed off every plank and the boat.” After 36 hours the storm finally abated, leaving the crew exhausted. Ten days after leaving Charleston, the Amistad arrived in Pointe-à-Pitre, where Howland “sold all my cargo to good advantage.”
In Pointe-à-Pitre, Howland delivered the schooner to her purchasers. Before they accepted the vessel they had her hove down for inspection. While her bottom was generally in good condition, several spots of rust showed through her copper. Some of her copper sheathing was removed, revealing scattered iron fastenings. Since Howland had represented her as fully copper fastened, the buyers protested, and a hearing was held before the U.S. consul. Howland represented that it was common practice to use scattered iron spikes, “as they were stronger in forcing a warped plank to the timber.” Nevertheless, the case was decided against Howland, and he was forced to reduce the sale price by $800. While this reduced his profit, “after all I made $400 more than cost on the sale of the vessel.”
As yet there is no record as to what became of Ion, ex-Amistad under her French owners in the Caribbean. Having been built of tropical hardwood and copper fastened she could have served them well for many more years. Perhaps some new information may yet come to light, but for now our knowledge of the Amistad ends with Howland's sale and her departure from the U.S. flag.
The New Amistad
After having accumulated a fair picture of the historic Amistad of 1839, how will we use this information in the design of the new vessel? First and foremost the new Amistad will be a seaworthy vessel meeting all modern standards of safety. From the inception of the idea of building this vessel, her intended mission has been to provide a platform to teach the lessons that are the legacy of the Amistad incident: history, cooperation, and leadership. We here at Mystic Seaport are keenly aware of the value of a traditional sailing vessel as a laboratory of these lessons. We have intended to build the vessel such that she can carry students of all ages on voyages of varying duration to provide the firsthand experience uniquely found in the environment aboard such a vessel.
Every vessel design is a series of compromises. Whether a small skiff or a large bulk-cargo carrier, compromises among various criteria of capacity, route, construction cost, and economics of trade dictates a vessel's final design. The same is true in the case of the recreation of the Amistad.
Were we fortunate enough to discover a half model or other primary form of documentation for this schooner, our operational mission would prohibit us from building a true “replica.” With the commitment to operate with program participants aboard, the design becomes subject to safety and stability criteria of the U.S. Coast Guard and other classification and regulatory bodies.
The true challenge of this process is to incorporate as much of the information we have gathered as possible into a design that meets these modern parameters, yet maintains the essence of the historic vessel's character. To accomplish this considerable task, Amistad America, Inc. has selected the naval architectural firm, Tri-Coastal Marine of Berkeley, California, and Annapolis, Maryland. The principals of this firm have been responsible for the design and execution of several of the most successful traditional schooner recreations in recent times, including the Pride of Baltimore II and the Lady Maryland, and have fully embraced the unique challenge this vessel represents.
The salient departures in the design from that of the historic Amistad are demanded by safety. External ballast, watertight bulkheads, and diesel engines—all unheard of in 1839—are today standard in ship construction and safety and are therefore incorporated into our new vessel design.
As a result, our new Amistad will be slightly larger than the original. As much as ten feet of the schooner's length and corresponding interior volume will be consumed by mechanical and safety equipment. Our basic dimensions have been increased proportionally so as not to lose valuable space for educational programs and exhibits. This increased length and proportional freeboard will provide an additional margin of safety and will maintain the vessel's historic appearance, while still meeting stringent modern stability requirements.
Construction of the new Amistad was scheduled to begin with a keel-laying ceremony on 8 March 1998. This date was chosen because it is the nearest Sunday to 9 March, the date on which, in 1841, Justice Joseph Story delivered the Supreme Court decision in favor of the African captives of the Amistad.
Construction will take two years and about 45,000 person hours to complete. Approximately 100,000 board feet of prime ship timber of various species, including live oak, white oak, and yellow pine will be used to build the vessel. In the spring of the year 2000, the new Amistad will begin her mission, sailing far and wide to tell the story of the Amistad incident and its important legacy to our nation's history.
Notes
1. New London Gazette, 28 August 1839.
2. The brig Washington was also an interesting vessel. She was built in Baltimore in 1837. During the early years of her career, she served as a coast survey brig in summer under U.S. Navy personnel, and as a revenue cutter in winter under Revenue Service personnel. In court documents she is referred to as “the public armed vessel Washington.” James T. Mooney, ed., Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships, 8 vols., (Washington, D.C.: Naval Historical Center, 1981), 8: 125.
3. New York Commercial Advertizer, 5 August 1839.
4. Ibid., 27 August 1839. From contemporary 1839 sources it seems clear that the vessel bore the name La Amistad—The Friendship—although the “La” was dropped from most references soon after the start of the trial. Our new vessel will be known simply as Amistad.
5. New York Evening Post, 23 August 1839.
6. Temporary Registry #15, for the schooner Ion, ex-Amistad, New London Customs Records, RG 36, National Archives Branch Depository, Waltham, Massachusetts.
7. Ibid. From 1789 until 1864 the means of measuring single-deck vessels, like Amistad, remained the same. In accordance with “An Act for Registering and Clearing Vessels, Regulating the Coasting Trade and for Other Purposes,” U.S. Statutes at Large 1(17): 675, Vol. I, 5th Cong., 3rd sess., Ch. 22, 1799, Sec. 64, length was taken from the “fore part of the main stem to the after part of the stern post above the deck.” The actual length overall is somewhat longer, allowing for overhang at stem and stern.
8. New York Herald, 28 August 1839.
9. Howard I. Chapelle, The Baltimore Clipper: Its Origin and Development (New York: Bonanza Books, 1930); Thomas C. Gillmer, Pride of Baltimore: The Story of the Baltimore Clippers (Camden, Maine: International Marine, 1992); Geoffrey Footner, Tidewater Triumph: The Development and Worldwide Success of the Chesapeake Bay Pilot Schooner (Mystic: Mystic Seaport, 1998).
10. Baltimore Sun, 14 September 1839.
11. Congressional Globe, 26th Cong., vol. 9: 93. Niles’ National Register, 31 October 1840, 144.
12. Howard I. Chapelle, The National Watercraft Collection, 2nd ed. (Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution, 1976), 26; Niles’ National Register, 3 August 1839, 364, 2 November 1839, 159.
13. George Howland, “An Autobiography or Journal of His Life, Voyages, and Travels with an Appendix of His Ancestry,” 1866, typescript, 295, Rhode Island Historical Society, Providence, Rhode Island. Perhaps by 1866 the romance of the Amistad saga had taken its toll on even Howland. While piracy was still prevalent on the north coast of Cuba in this era, there is no corroborating evidence to his assertion that the Amistad was built for piracy.
14. Antonio's testimony, as well as an inventory of the cargo on board, are included in the files on the case, Records of U.S. District Court for Connecticut, RG 21, National Archives Branch Depository, Waltham.
15. Leonard W. Labaree and Catherine Fennelly, comps. Public Records of the State of Connecticut, from May 1793 through October 1796 (Hartford: Connecticut State Library, 1951), xvii-xix; the 1830 federal census recorded 23 slaves in Connecticut, including four in New Haven, while the estimate for 1840 is 17, see Horatio T. Strother, The Underground Railroad in Connecticut (Middletown: Wesleyan University Press, 1962), appendices 3, 5.
16. Testimony of Dr. Sharp of the Washington's crew, in the District Court file on the case, RG 21, National Archives Branch Depository, Waltham.
17. New London Gazette, 29, 31 August, 4 September 1839.
18. Wilcox to Attorney General Holabird, n.d., The United States vs. The Amistad, Appellate Case 2161, Records of the Supreme Court of the United States, RG 267, National Archives, Washington, D.C.
19. Secretary of the Treasury to Gilpin, 14 December 1840, Correspondence of the Secretary of the Treasury, “Amistad” #49, NND 193, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C.; Congressional Globe, 26th Cong., vol. 9: 90; U.S. Statutes at Large, 1-28th Congress, 1789-1845, Private Laws, Vol. 6, Private Acts of the 26th Congress, Statute II, 3 March 1841, Chapter XXXIX, “An Act to Authorize the enrollment or registry of the Schooner Amistad.” “Be it enacted, & etc., That the Spanish Schooner Amistad, lately sold at New London, by the Marshall, in pursuance of an order of the District Court of the United States for the District of Connecticut, may be registered or enrolled, the same as if said schooner had been built within the United States, approved, March 3, 1841.”
20. Howland, “An Autobiography or Journal of His Life,” 297-303.
