<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html><head><style type="text/css"><!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { margin-top: 0 ; margin-bottom: 0 }
--></style><title>persons of color revisited</title></head><body>
<div>Silly me; I forgot to check google. A search under
"Amistad person of color" turned up, inter alia, the
following brief from John Quincy Adams, which indicates that the
denotation of "person of color" may not have been as broad
then as it is now (emphasis added):</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>U.S. Supreme Court<br>
<br>
<span
></span
> <span
></span
> <span
></span
> <span
></span
>
THE AMISTAD, 40 U.S. 518 (1841)<br>
<br>
<span
></span
> <span
></span
> <span
></span
> <span
></span
> <span
></span
> <span
></span> 40 U.S. 518<br>
<br>
<span
></span
> <span
></span
> <span
></span
> <span
></span
> <span
></span
> <span
></span> The AMISTAD.<br>
<br>
<span
></span
> <span
></span
> <span
></span
> <span
></span
> <span
></span> UNITED STATES,
Appellants,<br>
<span
></span
> <span
></span
> <span
></span
> <span
></span
> <span
></span
> <span
></span> v.<br>
The LIBELLANTS AND CLAIMANTS of the SCHOONER
AMISTAD, her tackle, apparel and furniture, together with her cargo,
and the AFRICANS<br>
<span
></span
> <span
></span
> <span
></span>
mentioned and described in the several libels and claims,
Appellees.<br>
<br>
<span
></span
> <span
></span
> <span
></span
> <span
></span
> <span
></span
>
January Term, 1841</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>... The attorney of the United States, in behalf of the United
States, prayed the<br>
court, on its being made legally to appear that the claim of the
Spanish minister was well founded, and was conformable to the treaty,
that the court make such order for the disposal<br>
of the said vessel, cargo and slaves as might best enable the United
States in all respect to comply with their treaty stipulations, and
preserve the public faith inviolate. But if it</div>
<div>should be made to appear, that the persons described as slaves,
were negroes and<b> persons of color</b>, who had been transported
from Africa, in violation of the laws of the United<br>
States, and brought within the United States, contrary to the same
laws, the attorney, in behalf of the United States, claimed, that in
such case, the court would make such further<br>
order in the premises, as would enable the United States, if deemed
expedient, to remove such persons to the coast of Africa, to be
delivered there to such agent or agents as might<br>
be authorized to receive and provide for them, pursuant to the laws
of the United States, in such case provided, or to make such other
order as to the court might seem fit, right and</div>
<div>proper in the premises...</div>
<div><br></div>
</body>
</html>