How Much Do We Really Know About Somerset v. Stewart (1772 ) ? The Missing Evidence of Contemporary Newspapers
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21451155 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Denis Worrall (0000-0001-7195-4360, North-West State Technical University, corresponding author), David Worrall |
| Year | 2022 |
| Volume | 43 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 574-593 |
| Publication date | 2022-07-03 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Slavery and Abolition (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0144-039X • E-ISSN: 1743-9523 |
| Publisher | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/0144039x.2022.2041316 |
| OpenAlex | W4213369790 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
This essay examines contemporary English newspapers as sources for Somerset v. Stewart (1772), the landmark trial of the slave, James Somerset. The trial, on a habeas corpus contested by Charles Stewart, Somerset’s alleged owner, was headed by William Murray, Lord Mansfield, and ended in Somerset’s discharge. Newspaper coverage, which often produced partial verbatim transcripts, has been neglected. Most citations rely on Folarin Olawale Shyllon. Today, only the transcripts of William Isaac Blanchard and Capel Lofft (edited by Andrew Lyall) are considered canonical. This essay argues that contemporary newspaper reports amount to a virtually parallel version of the trial, differing in major respects from Blanchard and Lofft. A newspaper (not reproduced in Lyall) provides the sole source for the 9 May hearing. A report in The Middlesex Journal cites an authority, Sir Robert Raymond, who does not appear in extant copies of the verdict, a ruling which has been the subject of exhaustive examination by scholars
Extant taxon · Library science · Newspaper · Political science · Sociology · Subject (documents) · Verdict · American Constitutional Law and Politics · History · Law · Legal principles and applications
| Citations per year | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2026 - 2026 (1) |
| Highly cited | No |