View Document Frames
"Mr. Butler to Mr. Vail, 18th November, 1839." U.S. Congress. House. Africans Taken in the Amistad. 26th Congress., 1st sess., 1840.H. Doc. 185.
Mr. Butler to Mr. Vail.
U. S. DlSTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE,
New York, November 18, 1839.
SIR: In reply to the inquiries made in your letter of the 9th instant, I have
the honor to make the following statement:
On the day after the interview with the Spanish minister, referred to in his letter
of the 5th of November, I visited Mr. Ruiz at the jail, and obtained from him all
the material facts of his case. Immediately after this, I had a conference with Mr.
Purroy, the counsel of Mr. Ruiz, by whom the application for the discharge of the
defendants had been made and argued before the State courts, and received from him
a copy of the papers, and a full statement of his proceedings.
In my subsequent reflections on the subject, and upon connecting the statements of
Mr. Purroy with some facts stated to me by Mr. Ruiz, I thought it advisable to inquire
into the laws of Cuba, in relation to several particulars which had not been adverted
to in the papers and argument, and so informed Mr. Purroy. Fortunately, we obtained
the assistance of a very competent Spanish lawyer, recently from Havana, where he
had been for many years a judge, from whom we received the needed information. It
did not, however, enable us to see any new ground for again asking for the discharge
of the defendant; and it was therefore decided by Mr. Purroy and myself that the
only course to be pursued, whether Mr. Ruiz gave bail to the actions, or remained
in prison, was to require the plaintiffs to file their declarations, and to proceed
to trial at the earliest possible day. This we shall accordingly do; and if the facts
communicated to me by Mr. Ruiz shall be proved, (as I think they may be,) it is not
at all probable that the plaintiffs can succeed in obtaining a verdict; indeed, I
think it exceedingly doubtful whether it is in the power of the plaintiffs to produce
sufficient evidence on their part to put the defendant to the necessity of a defence.
Under these circumstances and as the bail which would be required in the three suits
pending against Mr. Ruiz would not exceed $1000, and as I cannot think it probable
that any~further suits would be instituted against him, I have thought that he had
better give the bail, which could be easily procured, and, with the concurrence of
Mr. Purroy, have so advised. Mr. Ruiz, however, for various reasons, and, among others,
under the hope that his deliverance might be effected through the intervention of
the Government of the United States on the application of the Spanish minister, has
hitherto declined giving bail, and is, therefore, yet in prison.
[67]
In regard to the question, whether the Government can do any thing farther on this
branch of the subject, I can only reply, that, after a very careful consideration
of the facts, and of the views submitted to me by the Spanish minister, I cannot
see that any further step can at present be taken by the United States for the benefit
of Mr. Ruiz. It does not appear to me that any question has yet arisen under the
treaty with Spain; because, although it is an admitted general principle, that neither
the courts of this State, nor those of the United States, can take jurisdiction of
criminal offences committed by foreigners within the territory of a foreign State,
yet it is equally settled in this country, that our courts will take cognizance of
civil actions between foreigners transiently within our jurisdiction, founded
upon contracts or other transactions made or had in a foreign State, provided, by
the laws of such foreign State, the like civil action could have been brought in
the courts of that State. It was precisely to this last point that I called the attention
of the Spanish lawyer, whom we consulted; and, as he informed me that it was competent
for a person, having a capacity to sue, in the courts of Cuba, to maintain a civil
action for assault and false imprisonment, I could not doubt the capacity of
our courts to entertain the like suit. Whether the personal relations between the
parties to the present actions are such as to prevent the maintaining of any such
suit, is a question which involves the whole merits of the controversy, and which
the judges have already decided cannot be settled in limine.
Should any question bearing on this point, or on any other involved in the case,
arise upon the trial, under the treaty with Spain, it will, of course, be distinctly
presented by me; and if the decision be adverse, I shall advise the proper measures
to carry it to the higher tribunals, and ultimately, if needful, to the Supreme Court
of the United States, under the 25th section of the judiciary act of 1789.
1 am, sir, &c.,
B. F. BUTLER,
United States Attorney.
TO AARON VAIL,
Esq.,
Acting Secretary of State United States, Washington City.
