John Quincy Adams, o Amistad Case.

Na qualidade de interessado e estudioso da história dos EUA - muito pelo meu interesse no povo ameríndio - esta peça verídica, embora dramatizada para o grande écran, aflora a grandeza e superior inteligência duns poucos Presidentes da América. Neste caso, o do ligado aos escravos da escuna "Amistad", exemplo de humanidade, inteligência e domínio, ascendende total sobre a cultura aceite à época.
John Quincy Adams não foi só um Presidente dos EUA. Foi um génio. Este caso, o do barco negreiro "Amistad", mudou o rumo da história. A dramatização, sempre a ver, é uma fita, eu sei que é, mas o que é certo é que John Adams, com palavras, libertou homens condenados à escravatura. Referências ao que se passou naquele tribunal podem ser encontradas em qualquer biblioteca ou na internet. Na minha modesta opinião foi uma manifestação de génio. Extraordinário o cúmulo de juízes que deram toda a razão a John Adams. Evocou todos que o precederam, os insígnes antepassados, nome a nome, até à Constituição.
No fim, só um juíz (1 em 12) votou contra.
Consta nos anais que o líder dos escravos (Cinqu'e, cuja força tinha confessado a Adams que lhe vinha dos antepassados africanos) perguntou a John Quincy Adams que palavras usou para convencer o Supremo Tribunal.
John Quincy Adams respondeu-lhe : "As tuas".
Curiosa semelhança entre Cinqu'e e Quincy.

Espero ser bem compreendido. O post abaixo, (importante porque reproduz a essência do que se passou naquele Supremo Tribunal de Justiça) está em inglês. Para bom entendedor.
Para quem quiser eu tenho a versão original de 95 páginas :

Originally published in 1841 by S.W. Benedict.

ARGUMENT OF JOHN QUINCY ADAMS
MAY IT PLEASE YOUR HONORS.


O Presidente John Quicy Adams nunca fez uma referência explícita à guerra civil americana, contráriamente ao que é dito no final do julgamento do "Amistad".

Tenho aqui 93 páginas do original do discurso de John Quincy Adams. Não é fácil lê-las e relê-las porque ele era um "fora de série", um tipo genial.

A fita, o filme, é uma obra genial mas vamos à verdade, verdadinha :

estas foram as últimas palavras de John Quincy Adams perante o tribunal que mudou a história, que rebentou a tiro de canhão os fortes negreiros de Portugal, Espanha e Inglaterra na costa de África, da Sierra Leoa para cima e para baixo.

Não leiam. Peço-vos, por favor, por favor oiçam, John Quincy Adams (Anthony Hopkyns transfigurado, genial):

Alas! where is one of the very judges of the Court, arbiters of life and death, before whom I commenced this anxious argument, even now prematurely closed? Where are they all I Gone ! Gone ! All gone!— Gone from the services which, in their day and generation, they faithfully rendered to their country. From the excellent characters which they sustained in life, so far as I have had the means of knowing, I humbly hope, and fondly trust, that they have gone to receive the rewards of blessedness on high. In taking, then, my final leave of this Bar, and of this Honorable Court, I can only ejaculate a fervent petition to Heaven, that every member of it may go to his final account with as little of earthly frailty to answer for as those illustrious dead, and that you may, every one, after the close of a long and virtuous career in this world, be received at the portals of the next with the approving sentence—" Well done, good and faithful servant; enter thou into the joy of thy Lord."

Para quem se interessar :

... shall keep them safely, and send them to Cuba, all in a lump, the children as well as Cinque and Grabbo. Next, he denies the power of our courts to take any cognizance of the case. And finally, that the owners of the slaves shall be indemnified for any injury they may sustain in their property. We see in the whole of this transaction, a confusion of ideas and a contradiction of positions from confounding together the two capacities in which these people are attempted to be held. One moment they are viewed as merchandise, and the next as persons. The Spanish minister, the Secretary of State, and every one who has had anything to do with the case, all have run into these absurdities. These demands are utterly inconsistent. First, they are demanded as persons, as the subjects of Spain, to be delivered up as criminals, to be tried for their lives, and liable to be executed on the gibbet. Then they are demanded as chattels, the same as so many bags of coffee, or bales of cotton, belonging to owners, who have a right to be indemnified for any injury to their property.

The Africans, who certainly had the prima facie title to the property, did not bring the vessel into our waters themselves, but were brought here against their will, by the two Spaniards, by stratagem and deception. Now, if this court should consider, as the courts below have done, that the original voyage from Lomboko, in Africa, was continued by the Spaniards in the Amistad, and that pursuing that voyage was a violation of the laws of the United States, then the Spaniards are responsible for that offense. The deed begun in Africa was not consummated according to its original intention, until the Negroes were landed at their port of final destination in Porto Principe. The clandestine landing in Havana, the unlawful sale in the barracoons, the shipment on board the Amistad, were all parts of the original transaction. And it was in pursuit of that original unlawful intent that the Spaniards brought the vessel by stratagem into a port of the United States. Does the treaty apply to such voyages ? Suppose the owner had been on board, and his voyage lawful, what does the treaty secure to him? Why, that he might repair his ship, and purchase refreshments, and continue his voyage. Ruiz and Montes could not continue the voyage. But, suppose the article applicable, and what were the United States to do ? They must place those on board the ship in the situation they were in when taken, that is, the Africans in possession, with the two Spaniards as their prisoners, or their slaves, as the case might be; the Negroes as masters of the ship, to continue their voyage, which on their part was certainly lawful.


O Forte negreiro de LOMBOKO foi logo a seguir destruído a tiro de canhão.

Lamento não saber o nome do Capitão do navio que destruiu o forte de Lomboko, um depósito de escravos portugueses e espanhóis.

Este Capitão (americano), depois de destruir o forte à bala de canhão e reduzí-lo a escombros (já tinha retirado todos os escravos que lá estavam e pô-los a salvo) mandou uma mensagem ao governo, ao secretário de estado que duvidava da existência deste forte de escravos na Serra Leoa. Isto é histórico, há testemunhos escritos da época.

Repito, depois de ter libertado a tiro, com infantaria e contra os defensores do forte, quando vazio, reduziu o forte negreiro a cinzas, a tiro de canhão. Este brilhante Capitão mandou uma mensagem ao secretário de estado na altura :

Sir,

You were absolutely wright. The Sierra Leoa slaves fortification never existed.

Se há homens, há-os assim.