| Subject: |
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Salvage permits denied |
| Name: |
|
Bob Ward |
| Date Posted: |
|
Dec 15, 06 - 12:55 PM |
| Email: |
|
drake@newportnet.com |
| Message: |
|
Pat,
The conection between the 1733 fleet, the Juno, La Galga and Cortes's ships is that they are all examples of Spanish wrecks in US waters, and therefore all are covered by the 1902 Treaty.
The 11th Circuit might have a different history, but I think they will find it hard to put aside the precedent set by the 4th circuit in the Sea Hunt case, if they are comparing apples with apples, so to speak. However, the SeaHunt case included both elements that were specific to Spanish military vessels and some that were generic to the meaning of the 1902 Treaty. I am particularly interested in its application to the wrecks of private ships that were wrecked, and I think that private ships that were under contract to Spain at the time of their sinking might differ enough from ships belonging to Spain to produce a different judgement. Apples and oranges, perhaps.
I can tell you that some wrecks of Cortes ships have been found in US waters, though this is not yet public information and they are not in Florida waters. There is one company, Victor Benilous' ADV of West Palm Beach, that claims to have found a Cortes family wreck from 1757 off Cape Canaveral(see www.emeraldtreasure.com. They say it is about 12 miles offshore, in what would have been international waters when they claim to have found it, but which would now be US waters, since Clinton extended the contiguous zone in 1999 to 24 nm. However, I think the claim is BS and that the wreck probably does not exist. If the story was true, then this wreck would be an example of a privately owned Spanish ship wrecking in US waters and the wreck would therefore belong to the current Cortes heir. I would be interested to hear from anybody who has information as to whether this supposed wreck actually exists or not.
I think that the claims of indigenous people in the countries conquered by Spain to these sunken treasures have no legal validity, even if they have a moral case. These treasures were spoils of war. In any case, what Cortes did to the Aztecs was only what the Aztecs had done a couple of centuries earlier to the nations who previously occupied those parts of Mexico. Incidentally, the Aztecs did so with far more cruelty than Cortes, not that I am condoning his excesses. So which indigenous group would have the right to claim the treasure, and from whom should they claim it ... the descendents of the original inhabitants of Florida?
Bob Ward |
|
Replies:
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
Forum