HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.slavery/ssactsengr1021 and id is 1 raw text is: SOMERSET 1j. STEWART
proceeding for the future, and as a proof of the detestation of the jury to the action
itself.t
As to the proof of what papers were taken away, the plaintiff could have no
account of them; and those who were able to have given an account (which might
have been an extenuation of their guilt) have produced none. It lays upon the jury
to allow what weight they think proper to that part of the evidence. It is my opinion
the office precedents, which had been produced since the Revolution, are no justification
of a practice in itself illegal, and contrary to the fundamental principles of the constitu-
tion ; though its having been the constant practice of the office, might fairly be pleaded
in mitigation of damages.*
He then told the jury they had a very material affair to determine upon, and
recommended it to them to be particularly cautious in bringing in their verdict.
Observed, that if the jury found Mr. Wilkes the author or publisher of No. 45, it
will be filed, and stand upon record in the Court of Common Pleas, and of course be
produced as proof, upon the criminal cause depending, in barr of any future more
ample discussion of that matter on both sides ; that on the other side they should be
equally careful to do justice, according to the evidence ; he therefore left it to their
consideration.
The jury, after withdrawing for near half an hour, returned, and found a general
verdict upon both issues for the plaintiff, with a thousand pounds damages.
After the verdict was recorded, the Solicitor-General offered to prefer a bill of
exceptions, which the Lord Chief Justice refused to accept, saying it was out of time.
The Court sat at nine o'clock in the morning, and the verdict was brought in at
twenty minutes past eleven o'clock at night.
[1] EASTER TERM, 12 GEo. 3, 1772, K. B.
SOMERSET against STEWART. May 14, 1772.
On return to an habeas corpus, requiring Captain Knowles to shew cause for the
seizure and detainure of the complainant 'Somerset, a negro-the case appeared to be
this-
That the negro had been a slave to Mr. Stewart, in Virginia, had been purchased
from the African coast, in the course of the slave-trade, as tolerated in the plantations;
that he had been brought over to England by his master, who intending to return, by
force sent him on board of Captain Knowles's vessel, lying in the river; and was there,
by the order of his master, in the custody of Captain Knowles, detained against his
consent; until returned in obedience to the writ. And under this order, and the
facts stated, Captain Knowles relied in his justification.
Upon the second argument, (Serjeant Glynn was in the first, and, I think, Mr.
Mansfield) the pleading on behalf of the negro was opened by Mr. Hargrave. I need
not say that it will be found at large, and I presume has been read by most of the
profession, he having obliged the public with it himself: but I hope this summary
note, which I took of it at the time, will not be thought impertinent; as it is not easy
for a cause in which that gentleman has appeared, not to be materially injured by a
total omission of his share in it.
Mr. Hargrave.-The importance of the question will I hope justify to your Lordships
the solicitude with which I rise to defend it; and however unequal I feel myself, will
command attention. I trust, indeed, this is a cause sufficient to support my own
[2] unworthiness by its single intrinsic merit. I shall endeavour to state the grounds
from which Mr. Stewart's supposed right arises; and then offer, as appears to me,
sufficient confutation to his claim over the negro, as property, after having him brought
over to England ; (an absolute and unlimited property, or as right accruing from
contract;) Mr. Stewart insists on the former. The question on that is not whether
slavery is lawful in the colonies, (where a concurrence of unhappy circumstances has
caused it to be established as necessary;) but whether in Englandl Not whether it
t Vita reipublicw pax, et animi libertas et libdrtatis, firmissimum propugnaculum
sua cuique domui legibus munita.
Ut pcena ad paucos, metus ad omnes pertingat,
Judicandum est legibus no exemplis.
499
LOPJ T, i.](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr1021&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)