(a) Justice Joseph Story's three key questions regarding the enslaved passengers on The Amistad, focusing on origin, importation, and legal status, align with John Quincy Adams's argument against justifying slavery through war.
(b) Both emphasize the inalienable rights declared in the Declaration of Independence.
(a) Justice Joseph Story identifies three key questions as the test to determine whether the enslaved passengers on The Amistad are subject to Pinckney's Treaty of 1795:
1. Were the Africans on board The Amistad born in Africa or imported from a foreign country?
2. Were they imported into the United States or its territories after the 1st of May 1796?
3. Were they persons held in slavery or involuntary servitude?
(b) These questions relate to Adams's argument as they address the legal and historical context of the enslaved individuals on The Amistad. Adams argues against the notion that the principle of war and the rights of the victor could justify the enslavement of these individuals. The questions posed by Justice Story align with Adams's emphasis on the inalienable rights declared in the Declaration of Independence, challenging the argument that war gives the right to enslave. The legal scrutiny applied by Justice Story reflects Adams's broader stance against justifying slavery through war and emphasizes the importance of understanding the individuals' origin, importation, and legal status. Adams's argument supports the idea that enslavement contradicts the fundamental principles of liberty and inalienable rights.
The probable question may be:
From John Quincy Adams' oral argument in favor of the defendants: There is the principle, on which a particular decision is demanded from this Court, by the Official Journal of the Executive, on behalf of the southern states? Is that a principle recognized by this Court? Is it the principle of that Declaration [of Independence]? It is alleged in the Official Journal, that war gives the right to take the life of our enemy, and that this confers a right to make him a slave, on account of having spared his life. Is that the principle on which these United States stand before the world? That Declaration says that every man is "endowed by his Creator with certain inalienable rights," and that among these are "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." If these rights are inalienable, they are incompatible with the rights of the victor to take the life of his enemy in war or to spare his life and make him a slave. If this principle is sound, it reduces to brute force all the rights of man. It places all the sacred relations of life at the power of the strongest. No man has a right to life or liberty if he has an enemy able to take them from him. There is the principle. There is the whole argument of this paper. Now I do not deny that the only principle upon which color of right can be attributed to the condition of slavery is by assuming that the natural state of man is war. The bright intellect of the South, clearly saw, that without this principle for a cornerstone, he had no foundation for his argument. From John Quincy Adams' oral argument in favor of the defendants: There is the principle, on which a particular decision is demanded from this Court, by the Official Journal of the Executive, on behalf of the southern states? Is that a principle recognized by this Court? Is it the principle of that Declaration [of Independence]? It is alleged in the Official Journal, that war gives the right to take the life of our enemy, and that this confers a right to make him a slave, on account of having spared his life. Is that the principle on which these United States stand before the world? That Declaration says that every man is "endowed by his Creator with certain inalienable rights," and that among these are "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." If these rights are inalienable, they are incompatible with the rights of the victor to take the life of his enemy in war or to spare his life and make him a slave. If this principle is sound, it reduces to brute force all the rights of man. It places all the sacred relations of life at the power of the strongest. No man has a right to life or liberty if he has an enemy able to take them from him. There is the principle. There is the whole argument of this paper. Now I do not deny that the only principle upon which color of right can be attributed to the condition of slavery is by assuming that the natural state of man is war. The bright intellect of the South, clearly saw, that without this principle for a cornerstone, he had no foundation for his argument.
(a) What three key questions does Justice Joseph Story identify as the test to whether or not the enslaved passengers on The Amistad are subject to Pinckney’s Treaty of 1795?
(b) How do these questions relate to Adams’s argument? Support your answer with evidence from the text.