8th Class• 8th Class

• Start audio recording

• Review

• Women’s suffrage & other rights

• Villeinage

• Slavery

• Somerset v Stewart

• Abolitionism

Review: Women & Family I

• Early medieval period – Women treated in part like property

• Especially in laws relating to formation of marriage and adultery

– But maidens had equal rights to compensation for injury• And married women seem to have had a right to divorce and 50% of

marital property, if produced kids

• Later medieval period and early modern– Unmarried women had full rights in private law, but married

women did not– Marriage formed by free consent of man and wife

• Publicity required for validity by 1753 statute

– No divorce with right to remarry• Except in early modern period a special parliamentary legislation

Review: Women & Family II• 19th Century statutes gave women control over

property and right to make contracts• Divorce

– For cause divorce by statute in 19th-century• de facto divorce by mutual consent

– Unilateral divorce in late 20th century

Women’s Suffrage• Suffrage movement

– National movement for women to vote founded in 1872– Initially moderate, but turned more radical over time

• Stone throwing, window smashing, hunger strikes in prison– World War I manpower shortage led to women doing traditionally male

jobs• And thus changed perception of women

– 1918 statute. Women over 30 get right to vote under certain conditions (e.g. head of propertied household, married to propertied man, university graduate)

• Also gave right to vote to all males 21 or older• Women were 43% of electorate

– Would have been more than half, if all women over 21 could vote• Women also got right to be members of Parliament

– 1928. All women over 21 could vote

Women, Employment & Education• Equal Pay Act 1970

– equal pay for same or similar work • Sex Discrimination Act 1975

– makes discrimination against women or men, including discrimination on the grounds of marital status, illegal in the workplace.

• Also in Education and business – Enforced primarily by Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC), not

individual suits

Villeinage I• Most of the population in the later Middle Ages were

villeins– Bought and sold with land, not individually– Could bring lawsuits in royal court, e.g. covenant or trespass

• But not novel disseisin against his lord– Villein’s property technically belong to his lord

• But lord did not generally exercise this right– Lord could physically punish or imprison villein

• But villein could use criminal law if his lord maimed, raped, or killed him or her

– Villein could not leave land without lord’s consent• Villein paid “chevage” for right to live off manor

– Lord could require villein to work• The labor services limited by custom and manorial court

– Villein paid “merchet” for consent to marry• Conflict between manorial custom and church law

– Villein status inherited from father

Origin and Decline of Villeinage• Disputes about origin of the villeinage

– Almost certainly predates Norman conquest• Although distinction between villein and slave unclear

– Perhaps voluntary submission as a result of physical insecurity or desperate financial condition

• Disappeared in 15th century– Primarily as the result of the Black Death– Population decline induced competition among

lords for labor• Lords who wanted more labor enticed villeins from other

manors with promises of freedom and protection• Lords who wanted to retain their laborers granted them

freedom

Slavery• New World agricultural conditions revived slavery

– Sugar plantation work was so horrible, that it was nearly impossible to recruit free labor for it

• Large plantations in Caribbean with huge numbers of slaves– Production of cotton in American South also suitable to

slavery

Somerset v Stewart• 1) What is the essence of Lord Mansfield's argument? Is

it convincing?• 2) What was Lord Mansfield's attitude towards the case?

Was he happy to be deciding it? Why or why not? If not, how would he have preferred the case to have been resolved?

• 3) What were the lawyers' attitudes toward the case? Which side did they perceive public opinion to be on?

• 4) How do you think the case might have gotten to court, given that Somerset was a slave who presumably lacked the funds to hire lawyers?

• 5) How does the reasoning in this case (both in the lawyers' arguments and in the judge's opinion) compare to the reasoning you have seen in other civil cases in this class?

• 6) What, if anything, did you think was interesting, surprising, or confusing about this case?

Abolitionism• 1780s. Quakers establish antislavery committees• 1787 formation of the Committee for the Abolition of the Slave Trade

– Anglicans and Quakers– Parliamentary battle led by Wilberforce, Member of Parliament and

evangelical Christian• Concerned, in part, that slave trade led to avarice and greedamong

slave owners• Slave Trade Act 1807 made slave trade illegal in British Empire• Slavery Abolition Act 1833• England also worked to abolish slavery word-wide

– 1827 declared the slave trading was piracy, and therefore a violation of international law that the British navy could punish

– During the 19th century, the British navy seized over 1600 slave ships and freed over 150,00 slaves

– British negotiated treaties with other European powers and African chiefs to outlaw slavery