2 of 3

Sharp was not about to give in, and the brilliant autodidact began to study the law for himself in order to refute the Joint Opinion. Strong stumbled on the eminent Sir William Blackstone's approving citation of a 1701 slave case: The English "spirit of liberty is so deeply implanted in our constitution, and rooted in our very soil, that a slave or Negro, the moment he lands in England, falls under the protection of the laws, and with regard to all natural rights becomes so eo instanti a freeman." Elsewhere, Blackstone called the "absolute and unlimited power … given to the master over the life and fortune of the slave … repugnant to reason and the principles of natural law." (Blackstone blunted his language in later editions of his Commentaries.)

Sharp wrote up his own legal arguments against slavery in A Representation of the Injustice and Dangerous Tendency of Tolerating Slavery, or Even of Admitting the Least Claim to Private Property in the Persons of Men, in England, and sent it around to lawyers who would be arguing slave cases.

Courtroom drama
Sharp took on two more test cases: First, John Hylas, a former slave whose slave wife had been taken from him and sent back to slavery in the West Indies. And second, Thomas Lewis, a black who was kidnapped and put aboard a ship bound for Jamaica where he was to be sold as a slave. In both cases, the court ruled in favor of the blacks, but each time the verdict was framed too narrowly to set a precedent that would undermine the institution of slavery. That would have to wait for his next case—Somerset vs. Steuart.

James Somerset was an escaped slave. He had served his master, Charles Steuart in the Americas, but two years after arriving in England with Steuart, Somerset left him. Steuart was enraged and sent the slave-catchers after him.

The ensuing legal case featured several familiar actors: The barrister who had spoken against slavery in the Lewis case was now representing the pro-slavery Charles Steuart. Lord Mansfield, who had presided over the Lewis case was to judge this one as well. He was one of the most respected legal minds in England, and was something of a reformer, known for defending the rights of Catholics and non-conformists at a time when non-Anglicans suffered serious discrimination. And Granville Sharp took an interest in Somerset's case—as did slave-holding business interests from the West Indies. Money flowed from their coffers to Steuart, while principled anti-slavery lawyers did pro bono work for Somerset. Because Sharp was afraid he had antagonized Lord Mansfield in the Lewis case, he stayed in the background.

The case turned on several questions, including whether colonial laws had any validity in England. The legal arguments will sound familiar to those watching the advance of gay marriage today. All agreed that English law recognized a marriage from a foreign country—say Turkey. But if a man from Turkey brought multiple wives to England, he would be the target of a criminal prosecution. Did a slave's status in Virginia make him a slave in England? Or was slavery so odious to English notions of liberty that it was akin to polygamy?

next page... |  2 of 3

share this page

April 2005, Vol. 49, No. 4