Different English Court decision on slavery

In the 1770s an English Court said that since there was no specific law allowing slavery on British (as distinct from colonies) slaves became free on reaching England (and I presume Scotland and Wales

WI

a) It went differently and measurable numbers of slaves were held in England, perhaps doing early dangerous industrial work?

or

b) It banned slavery throughout the empire?
 

Kaptin Kurk

Banned
In the 1770s an English Court said that since there was no specific law allowing slavery on British (as distinct from colonies) slaves became free on reaching England (and I presume Scotland and Wales

WI

a) It went differently and measurable numbers of slaves were held in England, perhaps doing early dangerous industrial work?

or

b) It banned slavery throughout the empire?

Well, I'm not sure working class white English / British would have stood for any mass use of slaves in the home isles in the long run, so...I doubt you ever see it become a big institution, sans inviting republicanism.
 
In the 1770s an English Court said that since there was no specific law allowing slavery on British (as distinct from colonies) slaves became free on reaching England (and I presume Scotland and Wales

The Somersett Case only covered England & Wales (slavery didn't get abolished in Scotland until 1799).


a) It went differently and measurable numbers of slaves were held in England, perhaps doing early dangerous industrial work?
Somersett freed about 14,000 slaves in England, mostly domestic servants. The slaves in Scotland were mostly miners (and white). An attempt to import slaves for industrial purposes will only incite abolitionists and probably be impossible to police, as well as not cost effective (industrial workers only got near starvation wages as it was, it would be difficult to undercut them with slaves).

b) It banned slavery throughout the empire?
The ARW kicks of earlier and is almost as explicitly about defence of slavery as the ACW was, for starters.
 
Top