Somersett's Case

Background. Somerset was an enslaved man brought to England by Stewart in 1769; he escaped in October 1771 and was seized for shipment to Jamaica. His friends applied to the Court of King's Bench for a writ of habeas corpus, requiring the captain to produce Somerset and determine whether his imprisonment was lawful. Earlier freedom suits, including Shanley v Harvey (1763) and R v Stapylton (1771), had produced differing rulings.

Arguments and Hearing. Granville Sharp, an activist layman who continually sought test cases against the legal justifications for slavery, was Somersett's real backer. Mansfield ordered a hearing for 22 January 1772, but following an adjournment the case was not heard until 7 February 1772, after Somerset's counsel was granted time to prepare arguments. It was argued that while colonial laws might permit slavery, neither the common law of England nor any law made by Parliament recognised slavery's existence, making it illegal.

Aftermath and Limits. The ruling did not end slavery: it confirmed only that transporting a slave out of England and Wales against his or her will was illegal. The decision remained vague enough that Africans could still be hunted and kidnapped in London, Liverpool and Bristol for sale elsewhere, and 1770s advertisements show slaves continued to be bought and sold in England. Mansfield himself believed slavery continued, since his great-niece Dido Elizabeth Belle remained enslaved in his household until his 1793 will freed her. Still, the decision is considered a significant step in recognising the illegality of slavery, and it inspired freedom suits in Massachusetts in 1773–1774.