Slave Nation (30 page)

22
. Contents of the British papers and magazines are described in Gerzina,
Black London
, 130. Contents of the American colonial papers are discussed in
Chapter 2
. The initial interpretations of the decision by other courts in Britain confirmed the breadth of the ruling. Two opinions of lower British courts, one in 1773 and one in 1776, were preserved by Sharp. A lower court decision in 1773, Cay and Crichton, Prerogative Court, May 11, 1773, held that an executor of an estate need not report a slave as property of his dead master. The High Court of Admiralty decided that one who had been wrongly held as a slave aboard ship was entitled to recover from his master the value of his services, since the state of slavery did not exist.
Rogers alias Riggs v. Jones
, High Court of Admiralty, June 29, 1776. The
Rogers
decision posed an additional threat to slave owners; the possibility of back-pay liability to the slaves that were freed by the
Somerset
decision. Reports of both cases appear as appendices 10 and 11 to Granville Sharp, “The Just Limitation of Slavery,” (1776), which appears in “Tracts on Slavery, Including Just Limitations of Slavery in the Laws of God, References to and Extracts from Mansfield’s judgment, etc,” by Granville Sharp. Vol. 23 of a collection of pamphlets bound by Thomas Binns, London, in the 1830s, in possession of Antislavery International, 4 Stableyard Broomgrove Road, London, SW9,9tl. Scottish law followed this broad interpretation of
Somerset
. Wiecek,
Antislavery Constitutionalism
, 33

23
. Fielding,
Extracts from Penal Laws,
3.

24
. See Gerzina,
Black London
, 123–132, 165–204 for a discussion of the post-
Somerset
issues concerning slavery in England.

25
. Benjamin Franklin, “The Somerset Case and the Slave Trade,” London Chronicle, June 20, 1772.

26
. Oldham, “New Light on Mansfield,” 65–66.

27
. Fryer,
Staying Power
, 203–207, describes how British slaves emancipated themselves by walking away from their masters.

28
. Edward Ball,
Slaves in the Family
(New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 1998) 218

C
HAPTER
2
T
HE
T
INDERBOX

1
. Bradley,
Slavery, Propaganda,
68–80 provided the basis for the following table.

2
. Wiecek,
Antislavery Constitutionalism
, 40

3
.
South Carolina Gazette and Country Journal
, Tuesday, Sept. 15, 1772

4
. Ibid. September 22, 1772

5
. All of the early charters contained restrictions on colonial legislation which echoed these statutes prohibiting legislation which was repugnant or contrary to, and permitting legislation which was agreeable to, the laws of England. The charters are collected in Thorpe,
Federal and State Constitutions
. The Virginia charter appears in Vol. 7, p. 3806; North Carolina charter at Vol. 5, 2755; Georgia charter at Vol. 2, p. 770. The Maryland charter of 1632 required laws to “be consonant to reason and be not repugnant nor contrary, but (so far as conveniently may be done) agreeable to the laws…of England.” Vol. 2 p. 1681. Similar statements appear in the charters of Pennsylvania, vol. 5 p. 3038; Massachusetts (1620) Vol. 3, p. 1833, (1629) vol. 3, p. 1833, (1691) Vol. 3, p. 1882; New Jersey (1664) Vol. 5, p. 2538, (1712) Vol. 5, p. 1712; Rhode Island (1663) Vol. 6, 3215; Connecticut (1662) Vol. 1, p. 533.

6
. Those in Virginia would have remembered the extensive litigation involving a Virginia law that allowed debtors to pay debts based on an artificially low value of tobacco, adopted because of the skyrocketing value of tobacco due to a bad crop in 1758. The clergy, whose salary had previously been fixed at the weight of tobacco, were—along with other creditors—denied the benefit of the increase in price. They appealed to the board of trade to invalidate the law as inconsistent with the previously fixed rate.

The Board of Trade eventually concluded that the law was disallowed but was not clear on whether the disallowance was retroactive to cover the period of the parsons’ complaint. The parsons then sued in local courts to recover their loss. Some were thrown out on grounds that the disallowance was not retroactive, but one court held that the law was retroactive. It then empanelled a jury to determine how much the parsons should recover. This case was Patrick Henry’s introduction to Virginia politics. He was so persuasive that the parsons should be treated like all other creditors that the jury awarded one cent in damages. Mayer,
Son of Thunder
, 59–66; Goebel,
Cases and Materials,
80–81. Randall,
Thomas Jefferson
, 160–167 suggests that Jefferson’s thinking about the relation between Britain and the colonies had crystallized while working on a case that involved parliamentary control over divorce

7
. South Carolina act regarding payment of monies, 1770; New York omnibus act adopting English statutes, 1770; New Jersey inheritance law, 1771. In 1772 the Privy Council struck down a North Carolina anti-riot act, and a Dominica act regarding tax bills. Goebel,
Cases and Materials
, 72n102.

8
. Brands,
First American,
363–370

9
. Chitwood,
Richard Henry Lee
, 36–37; McGaughy,
Richard Henry Lee of Virginia
, 77–78

10
. McGaughy,
Richard Henry Lee of Virginia
, 77–78

11
. Bailyn,
The Ordeal of Thomas Hutchinson,
365–369

12
. The Declaratory Act of 1766 asserted:

“that the said colonies and plantations in America have been, are, and of right ought to be, subordinate unto and dependent upon the imperial crown and Parliament of Great Britain, and that the King’s majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the lords spiritual and temporal, and commons of Great Britain, in Parliament assembled, had, hath, and of right ought to have, full power and authority to make laws and statutes of sufficient force and validity to bind the colonies and people of America, subjects of the crown of Great Britain, in all cases whatsoever.” Commager,
Documents,
60

13
. Morrison
Oxford History,
256–258

14
. Rakove,
National Politics
, 4

15
. Jefferson, “Autobiography,” in Foner,
Basic Writings of Thomas Jefferson
, 411–12

16
. McCullough,
John Adams
, 67

17
. Maier,
From Resistance to Revolution
, 220–26, describes the continuing efforts to keep the public focused on British misdeeds during this period.

18
. Ferling,
Leap in the Dark
, 68–70

19
. “uneasy truce,” Alden,
History of the American Revolution
, 125. “quiet years,” Egnal,
A Mighty Empire
, 247–269. “In reality, for most of the last three years [1770–1773] the government paid little attention to the colonies.…[Lord] North was content to let colonial affairs drift, as long as they drifted quietly.” Middlekauff,
Glorious Cause
, 208–209.

20
. Andrews,
Colonial Background
, 152, “The years from 1770 to 1773 were a time of comparative calm. Business revived, commercial prosperity returned, the moderates had the situation well in hand, and the Sons of Liberty, who had greeted the collapse of the non-importation movement with vexation of spirit, were for the moment discredited and under a cloud.”

See also, Miller, “The Decline of the Revolutionary Movement,”
Origins of the American Revolution
, 315–325; Robert McCluer Calhoon,
Revolutionary America: An Interpretive Overview
(Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich, 1976) 52, “time of quiet in imperial colonial relations.”

21
. Hildreth,
History of the United States
, 567

22
. Greene,
Negotiated Authorities
, 259–318

23
. Ibid. 240–241

24
. Rogers,
Papers of Henry Laurens
, 435–6. Dunning was Stewart’s lawyer in the
Somerset
case. See Davis,
Problem of Slavery
, 472,493–94, 498

25
. Laurens may have obsessed over the
Somerset
decision. On September 21, 1773, the
South Carolina Country Journal
published an advertisement for four slaves who had run away from the plantation of Henry Laurens in September and December 1772, “the following NEW NEGROES, viz. SOMERSET, his country name Massery, about 5 feet 8 or 9 inches high, slim, long visage, and very black, of the Mandingo country.” Rogers,
Papers of Henry Laurens
, Vol. 7, 109

26
. Laurens’ opposition to slavery was stated in 1776. “I abhor slavery,” he wrote in a letter to his son John of August 14, 1776 and indicated his intention to begin manumission of his hundreds of slaves. Philip M. Hamer Ed.
Papers of Henry Laurens
, (Columbia, SC: University of SC Press, 1979) Vol. 1 99–100

27
. Lindsay, “Diplomatic Relations,” 391–419

28
. Rogers,
Papers of Henry Laurens
, v8,464. See letters from Laurens to Appleby, 464; to Appleby, 466; to J. Clay, 468n6. Laurens evidently kept his own black servant with him in England.

29
. “Mass Hist. Soc. Proceedings XLIII,” in Davis,
Problem of Slavery
, 494n44

30
.
Virginia Gazette
(P & O) June 30, 1774

31
. See discussion in Finkelman,
Imperfect Union
, 39, “It is clear that this quotation [slavery is so odious] was widely circulated and believed in Britain and America. Americans and Englishmen, including the knowledgeable Granville Sharp, interpreted
Somerset
as ending slavery in England.” See also, Wiecek,
Antislavery Constitutionalism
, 20–39

32
. The relation between slavery and land values is discussed in Oakes,
Ruling Race
, 12–14 [pre-Revolution], 73 [post-Revolutionary period]

33
. Henretta, “Wealth and Social Structure,” 273–742

34
. Morgan,
American Slavery, American Freedom
, 295-315

35
. Ibid. 344, 380–381, 386

36
. Breen,
Tobacco Culture,
161–175

37
. See text at notes, 25, 50, 51

38
. Ferling,
Setting the World Ablaze
, 64–91, notes the parallel development of Adams’s and Jefferson’s concepts of colonial freedom.

39
. Jefferson, “Autobiography,” in Ford,
Works
, 9–10.

40
. Chamberlain,
John Adams
, 58

41
. Butterfield,
Diary and Autobiography
, Vol. 2, 75

42
. The Adams had five children. Abigail Amelia Adams (1765–1813), John Quincy Adams, who also served one term as president (1767–1848), Susanna Adams (1768–1770), Charles Adams (1770–1832), and Thomas Adams(1772-1832)

43
. Bailyn,
Ordeal of Thomas Hutchinson
, 196–220

44
. Halliday,
Understanding Thomas Jefferson
, 31–43

45
. Randall,
Thomas Jefferson,
163–67.

46
. Goebel,
Cases and Materials
, 72

47
. Thomas Jefferson, “A Summary View of the Rights of British America” (Avalon Project, Yale Law School)
www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/jeffsumm.htm
“Our ancestors, before their emigration to America, were the free inhabitants of the British dominions in Europe, and possessed a right which nature has given to all men, of departing from the country in which chance, not choice, has placed them, of going in quest of new habitations, and of there establishing new societies, under such laws and regulations as to them shall seem most likely to promote public happiness.…America was conquered, and her settlements made, and firmly established, at the expense of individuals and not of the British public. Their own blood was spilt in acquiring lands for their settlement, their own fortunes expended in making that settlement effectual; for themselves they fought, for themselves they conquered, and for themselves alone they have right to hold. Not a shilling was ever issued from the public treasures of his majesty, or his ancestors, for their assistance, till of very late times, after the colonies had become established on a firm and permanent footing.…That settlements having been thus effected in the wilds of America, the emigrants thought proper to adopt that system of laws under which they had hitherto lived in the mother country, and to continue their union with her by submitting themselves to the same common sovereign, who was thereby made the central link connecting the several parts of the empire thus newly multiplied.”

48
. Adams view was that if “sovereignty” was unitary, so that England either had complete control over the colonies or none at all, the answer was “none” because Britain never claimed the right to enslave the colonies. See
Chapter 5
.