Slavery at Common Law - Early Common Law

Early Common Law

Slavery
Contemporary
  • Africa
  • Bangladesh
  • China
  • Europe
  • Haiti
  • India
  • Mali
  • Mauritania
  • Niger
  • North Korea
  • Pakistan
  • Sudan
  • United States
Types
  • Bride-buying
  • Child labour
  • Debt bondage
  • Human trafficking
  • Impressment
  • Peonage
  • Penal labour
  • Sexual slavery
  • Wage slavery
Historic
  • History
  • Antiquity
  • Aztec
  • Ancient Greece
  • Ancient Rome
  • Medieval Europe
  • Thrall
  • Kholop
  • Serfdom
  • Slave ship
  • Slave raiding
  • Blackbirding
  • Galley slave
  • Panyarring
By country or region
  • Africa
  • Atlantic
  • Arab
  • Barbary
  • Spanish New World
  • Angola
  • Bhutan
  • Brazil
  • Britain and Ireland
  • British Virgin Islands
  • Canada
  • China
  • Haiti
  • India
  • Iran
  • Japan
  • Libya
  • Ottoman Empire
  • Portugal
  • Romania
  • Seychelles
  • Somalia
  • South Africa
  • Sweden
  • United States
Religion
  • Bible
  • Christianity
  • Islam
  • Judaism
Opposition and resistance
  • Timeline
  • Abolitionism
  • Compensated emancipation
  • Opponents
  • Slave rebellion
Related topics
  • Abolitionism
  • Indentured servant
  • Unfree labour

For most of the early common law history, the courts were not called upon to consider the position in relation to slavery. However, the law did, from at least the time of the Magna Carta of 1215 recognise that all persons had a basic right to liberty, and it was recognised before that date that persons had a basic right not to be the subject of assaults by others. Accordingly, it has been subsequently argued (most famously by Granville Sharp in Somersett's Case) that as slavery usually involved one or both of these things, it would only be lawful if there was positive legal impetus for its legality. However, this analysis does not square particularly well with the law of the time as a whole; serfdom, and later villeiny, involved both a loss of freedom and in certain circumstances the law permitted physical chastisement of serfs, villeins and even indentured apprentices.

In 1102 the Council of Westminster held in London issued a decree: "Let no one hereafter presume to engage in that nefarious trade in which hitherto in England men were usually sold like brute animals." The legislative force of this decree is not certain; it was intended to abolish the trading of serfs in London, but the decree is sometimes cited as authority for the proposition that trading in slaves became illegal in England at that date. Even if that is correct (which is open to question, subsequent cases distinguishing between villeiny (although not serfdom) and slavery), it is clear that the law was not expressed to abrogate the status of either serfs generally, or slaves who were brought to England from abroad. There are also reports relating to Irish decree in 1171 "that all the English slaves in the whole of Ireland, be immediately emancipated and restored to their former liberty." The same source indicates that slavery in England was abolished by a general charter of emancipation in 1381. Other historical sources for such an emancipation proclamation appear thin, although the date would coincide with the Peasants' Revolt, after which a number of concessions were made by the 14 year old King Richard II, which were later rescinded. Certainly villeinage continued in England, slowly decaying, until the last villein died in the early 17th century.

In later common law cases, none of the foregoing decrees or proclamations were cited or referred to as binding law in relation to the status of slaves generally.

Read more about this topic:  Slavery At Common Law

Famous quotes containing the words early, common and/or law:

    We do not preach great things but we live them.
    Marcus Minucius Felix (late 2nd or early 3rd ce, Roman Christian apologist. Octavius, 38. 6, trans. by G.H. Rendell.

    When a man says that he is Jesus or Napoleon, or that the Martians are after him, or claims something else that seems outrageous to common sense, he is labeled psychotic and locked up in a madhouse. Freedom of speech is only for normal people.
    Thomas Szasz (b. 1920)

    They are free, but not entirely free. For Law is despot over them, and they fear him much more than your men fear you.
    Herodotus (c. 484–424 B.C.)