66

soon

one

gled by human system, and unclouded by fallible comment, to the extremities of the earth;-all this, and much more, the eulogist might be well content to obliterate from his narration, in order to place in single and majestic prominence the historical record, that Granville Sharp was the personal abolitionist of African slavery in England, and the first and chief agent in the ultimate extinction of that abominable traffic which for so many years swelled the catalogue of our national sins, and poured terror and devastation over a large portion of the human race. The incipient events which led to this result, are probably familiar to many of our readers; we shall therefore only touch upon a few cursory points necessary to illustrate the personal history of Mr. Sharp. At the period when this venerable philanthropist began his career, the condition of negro slaves imported into this country was undecided by judicial authority. The humane and inflexibly upright Chief Justice Holt had, indeed, given his opinion many years before, that as as a negro comes into England he is free, because may be a villeyn in England, but not a slave." But, in opposition to this authority, and to obviate its effects on the West India interest, an opinion was procured by some interested persons in 1729, from the Attorney and Solicitor General, York and Talbot, declaring, that "a slave by coming from the West Indies to England or Ireland, either with or without his master, doth not become free, and his master's property or right in him is not thereby determined or varied;" "we are also of opinion," they add," that his master may legally compel him to return again to the plantations." So deep an impression was made on the public, and even on the members of the legal profession, by the wide and artful circulation given to this opinion, that, in spite of instances which had actually occurred of slaves being liberated upon the principle set down by Chief Justice Holt, Mr. Sharp was informed, even by his own professional advocates, that it would be useless to suffer the point to be tried, especially as Lord Mansfield, to whom it would fall to decide it, and whose legal weight was accustomed to sway both the bar and the bench, was confessedly of the same opinion with York and Talbot. The great doubt which hung over the point may be still further inferred from the following curious circumstance. Mr. Sharp had noticed, among the authorities in his favour, a passage from Judge Blackstone, declaring, that "a negro, the moment he lands in England, falls under the protection of the laws, and becomes eo instanti, a freeman." This passage being quoted on che of the trials in which Mr. Sharp was engaged, the opposite counsel produced in court the volume from which the quotation was professed to be taken, and challenged the con

tending party to find any such assertion. It amazed, but did not daunt Mr. Sharp to discover that the passage, as produced in court, was only that a negro on landing in England "falls under the protection of the laws, and so far becomes a freeman, though his master's right to his service may possibly continue." It afterwards appeared that Dr. Blackstone had altered the passage in the course of these trials; and we recollect to have seen or heard it stated some years ago, that Mr. Sharp informed a friend that Blackstone confessed himself to have made this, as well as some other alterations respecting the liberty of the subject, at the express suggestion of Lord Mansfield himself.

The disrespect shown at this time for human freedom, as regarded the unfortunate African race, was so flagrant, that our common newspapers not unfrequently contained advertisements for the sale of slaves in common with live and dead stock. One, for example, quoted from the Gazetteer of April 18, 1769, classes together for sale, "at the Bull and Gate, Holborn, a chesnut gelding, a Tim whisky, and a well made good-tempered black boy. Rewards were frequently offered for securing fugitives, and conveying them to specified ships in the river Thames; with, however, a proviso, which proved that the parties had either some fear or some shame left, or at least thought the public had "The utmost secrecy, may be depended on.' Our American colonies were more unblushing in their slave transactions. "To be sold," says the New York Journal of October 22, 1767, a healthy negro wench, of about twenty-one years old; is a tolerable cook, and capable of doing all sorts of house-work; can be well recommended for her honesty and sobriety; she has a female child of nigh three years old, which will be sold with the wench, IF REQUIRED!" The revengeful spirit displayed in the two following advertisements, is justly denominated by our author as "next to infernal." The first is from the Williamsburg Gazette, in Virginia: "Run away from the subscriber, a lusty, strong, bony negro fellow, named Bob, of a brownish complexion, &c. &c. The said fellow is outlawed, and I will give ten pounds reward for his head severed from his body, or forty shillings if brought alive." The other advertisement from the North Carolina newspaper is to the same effect, with the addition of an allusion to an act of Assembly by which a slave absenting himself from his master's service three months, was outlawed, and being outlawed, a certain sum was allowed to any person who would kill him, and bring his head duly certificated to his master.

Such was the state of legal opinion, and such the apathy of the public on this great question, both in Great Britain and her American colonies, when Mr. Sharp's celebrated case of the negro, Jonathan Strong, came on for hearing before Lord Mans

field. Strong was the slave of David Lisle, a lawyer, at Barbadoes, who had treated him with such barbarity that he had by degrees rendered him quite useless, and at length had turned him adrift in the streets of London. Strong, in his casual rambles, was recommended by a stranger to apply at the surgery of Mr. William Sharp for medical assistance, having been greatly injured in his person and health by cruel treatment. At the surgery he happened to meet Granville, who, with his brother's assistance, succeeded in restoring him to health, and procured him a comfortable situation in the service of a respectable apothecary. Here he remained two years; till being accidentally recognized behind a carriage by his old master, Lisle, who perceived that he was again capable of service, he was a few days after seized by stratagem, and conveyed to the Poultry Compter. Mr. Sharp, as soon as he heard of the detention, formation to the Lord Mayor that a person of the name of Strong was confined in that prison without a warrant, and procured his appearance at the Mansion House, where two persons attended to claim him in virtue of a bill of sale, signed by Lisle. The Lord Mayor decided that " as the lad had not stolen any thing, and was not guilty of any offence," he was at liberty to go away; upon which the captain, who was waiting to carry him off to Jamaica, seized him; but being charged by Mr. Sharp for an assault, quitted his hold, and Strong walked out of court, following his benevolent liberator.

gave in

In consequence of these transactions, Mr. Sharp was in a few days charged by a writ with having robbed Lisle of his slave, and various efforts were made to intimidate him. Lisle went so far as to call on him in person, and after many angry, but ineffectual, denunciations of revenge, attempted to provoke him by a challenge, in which he asked for "gentlemanlike satisfaction." Mr. Sharp coolly replied, that as Mr. Lisle had studied the law so many years, “he should want no satisfaction which the law could give him." He was not, however, then aware of the difficulties in the way of his defence, "never," he says, "having once opened a law book to consult it till on occasion of the present cause." The result of his application to counsel we have already mentioned. But it was not the character of Mr. Sharp to despair. "Forsaken," he remarks, "by my professional defenders, I was compelled, through the want of regular legal assistance, to make a hopeless attempt at selfdefence; though I was totally unacquainted either with the practice of the law, or the foundations of it; having never opened a law book, except the Bible, in my life until that time, when I most reluctantly undertook to search the indexes of a faw library, which my bookseller had lately purchased.” In

consequence of this resolution, Mr. Sharp gave himself, for nearly two years, to an intense study of the English laws with regard to the liberty of person; and collected an immense mass of matter bearing on the subject, the principal parts of which he condensed into a tract, the substance of which was handed about, in more than twenty manuscript copies, among the gentlemen of the law, for nearly two years, during which Lisle contrived to suspend the action. This tract produced such an effect that Lisle at length declined bringing forward the action at all, and was in consequence compelled to pay triple costs. The great point at issue therefore remained undecided.

The case of Hylas next occurred. Hylas and Mary were slaves, and being such were brought over to England in 1754; where they were married by consent of their respective master and mistress. In 1766, Mary was sent away to the West Indies without her husband's consent, and the present action was brought for damages. The decision was in favour of the plaintiff; and the defendant was bound, under a penalty, to bring back the woman, and restore her to Hylas within six months. Some technical circumstances, however, prevented this case being ranked as an authoritative decision on the abstract question, whether a slave remains such in Great Britain.

Neither was the case of Lewis, which Mr. Sharp next brought forward, decisive. Lewis had been the slave of Stapylton, who, with the aid of two watermen, hired for that purpose, seized Lewis in a dark night, and after a struggle dragged him on his back into the Thames; and having tied his legs, and gagged his mouth with a stick, rowed him down to a vessel bound for Jamaica, the master of which was privy to the plot. The servants of Mrs. Banks (the mother of the late Sir Joseph Banks), who resided near the spot, noticed the struggle, and stated the circumstances to their mistress, who applied to Mr. Sharp to know how to act. In consequence, a warrant was procured, and sent on board the vessel at Gravesend, but was too late, the ship having set sail for the Downs. A writ of habeas corpus was therefore obtained, after some delay, arising from the accidental necessity of applying successively to several magistrates, and was served on board the vessel. It is probably to this case that Mr. Clarkson alludes in the following passage quoted by our

author:

"The vessel on board which a poor African had been dragged and confined, had reached the Downs, and had actually got under weigh for the West Indies. In a few hours it would have been out of sight. Just at this critical moment, the writ of habeas corpus was carried on board. The officer who served it, saw the miserable captive chained to the main-mast, bathed in tears, and casting a last mournful look on the land

of freedom, which was just receding from his sight. The captain, on receiving the writ, became outrageous; but knowing the serious consequences of resisting the laws of the land, he gave up his prisoner, whom the officer carried safe, but now crying for joy, to the shore.'" (P. 69.)

A bill, preferred by Mr. Sharp, was found against Stapylton, and the two watermen; but in order to throw difficulties in the way, and to increase the expenses of the prosecution, the cause was removed by the defendants into the King's Bench, where it came on before Lord Mansfield, Feb. 20, 1771. The defence was simply that Lewis was Stapylton's slave, so that the important point, it was hoped, would at length be decided; but Lord Mansfield avoided bringing the question to issue by discharging the negro on another ground, namely, that the defendant had not proved even his nominal property in the plaintiff. It was, on this occasion, that Mr.Dunning, afterwards Lord Ashburton, one of the counsel for the negro, holding up Mr. Sharp's manuscript tract in his hand, declared himself prepared to maintain in any court in Great Britain, that no man can be legally detained as a slave in this country. Lord Mansfield seems to have been much embarrassed on the occasion; his former opinion in favour of the slave-holder, having apparently been considerably shaken by Mr. Sharp's arguments; for such those of his counsel confessedly were; and his Lordship went so far as to declare that it might be much better if the question were never finally set to rest, adding: "I don't know what the consequences might be if the masters were to lose their property by accidentally bringing their slaves to England. I hope it never will be finally discussed, for I would have all masters think them free, and all negroes think they were not, because then they would both behave better." But though the decision was in favour of the negro, Lord Mansfield waved giving judgment against the defendant, and expressed surprise that the prosecutors should demand it. Mr. Sharp drew up a strong protest against this procedure, which, however, as appears from a manuscript note, he "reserved to himself till there should be absolute necessity for disclosing it," not wishing to excite public prejudice, especially against a person in authority. When he afterwards had occasion to communicate his observations on the case to his own counsel in a similar cause, he did it under an injunction of secresy; and so anxious was he to avoid ostentation, or irritating the minds of the parties concerned, and especially Lord Mansfield, that he seldom was seen in court, and carefully declined any visible interference. Indeed, so far did he carry his modesty, that he seldom mentions his own part in the proceedings, even in his private letters. In writing, for instance, to Mrs. Banks, he requests her acceptance of a copy of the trial, written from short-hand notes, "because a