the
Africans rose, killed the captain and crew, and took possession of the
vessel--sparing the lives of their purchaser's, Ruiz and Montes. This
transaction was unquestionably justifiable on the part of the negroes.
They had been stolen from their native land--had fallen into the hands of
pirates and robbers, and reduced to abject slavery. According to the first
law of nature--the law of self-defence--implanted in the bosom of every
human being by the Creator, they were justified in taking any measures
necessary to restore them to the enjoyment of that freedom which was
theirs by birthright.

The negroes being unable to manage the schooner, compelled Ruiz and
Montes to navigate her, and directed them to shape her course for Africa;
for it was their design to return to their native land. But they were
deceived by the two Spaniards, who brought the schooner to the coast of
the United States, where she was taken possession of by Lieut. Gedney, of
the U. S. surveying brig Washington, a few miles off Montauk Point, and
brought into New London, Conn., The two Spaniards claimed the Africans as
their property; and the Spanish Minister demanded of the President of the
United States, that they be delivered up to the proper authorities, and
taken back to Havana, to be tried for piracy and murder. The matter was
brought before the District Court of Connecticut.

In the mean time President Van Buren ordered the U. S. schooner Grampus,
Lieut. John S. Paine, to repair to New Haven, to be in readiness to convey
the Africans to Havana, should such be the decision of the Court. But the
Court decided that the Government of the United States had no authority to
return them into slavery; and directed that they be conveyed in one of our
public ships to the shores of Africa, from whence they had but recently
been torn away. From this decision the U. S. District Attorney appealed to
the Supreme Court of the United States.

These transactions attracted the attention of the whole people of the
Union, and naturally excited the sympathy of the masses, pro and con, as
they were favorable or unfavorable to the institution of slavery. Who
should defend, in the Supreme Court, these poor outcasts--ignorant,
degraded, wretched--who, fired with a noble energy, had burst the shackles
of slavery, and by a wave of fortune had been thrown into the midst of a
people professing freedom, yet keeping their feet on the necks of millions
of slaves? The eyes of a