Celebrating the enslaved

RECENTLY, I was in the office of the principal of The Mico University College and the book Thomas Buxton and Liberation of Slaves (2001) by Oliver Barclay caught my attention. In the book, it is stated, "1772 - All slaves living in UK are legally free". This is reinforcing the view that in 1772, Lord Mansfield ruled in the Somerset case that all enslaved persons were set free in England. This is what CXC students are being taught and what has been stated in CXC history revision series - "The Somerset case results in the passage of a law which declares slavery illegal in England" (Youthlink, January 20-26, 2009 and January 2011).

It is for that reason that I took issue with the statement in Dr Daive Dunkley's book that "slavery was not practised in England". In fact, both the incorrect and correct interpretations of the Mansfield ruling indicate that slavery was practised in England. However, Dunkley used two articles to defend his assertion, making a distinction between the practice and presence of slavery.

It is beyond dispute that there were many enslaved persons in Britain. I referred to newspaper advertisements showing enslaved persons being bought and sold in England. Dunkley acknowledges slave trading in England, but he did not retract from the comment that "slavery was not practised in England".

British enslaved persons had to carry out domestic chores, and the trade of the enslaved in Britain means that slavery was practised in England. I have seen no record of anyone being arrested for engaging in the trade of enslaved persons. It therefore means that slavery was practised openly and legally in England.

And that Mansfield did not free the enslaved in England is well known. Dunkley said, "Mansfield did not wish to destroy slavery". This meant slave owners were free to practise slavery in England. It is important to record that Mansfield's ruling did not set free all the enslaved persons in England. To claim that Mansfield freed all enslaved persons in 1772 and to claim that slavery was not practised in England is to ignore the humiliation of the enslaved who were sold and bought in England; make light of the suffering of the enslaved in England; and ignore the claim of their descendants for reparations. We need to be celebrating the enslaved who endured slavery and who asserted their freedom and fought for their freedom in England in the 18th and 19th centuries.

UNINTELLIGIBLE RESPONSES

There are many of Dunkley's responses to my articles that I do not understand. For example, I said of Gosse's work and Dunkley's work, "This work (Gosse) will have important best practices for Jamaican businesses in this new economic environment. These two outstanding works by these young historians challenge us to rethink old reasoning and to apply better research to making our society prosperous." It is clear that I made a judgement that we should follow the example of these two authors who engaged in better research, and this paradigm can help us to make the society more prosperous. Hear Dunkley's response: "Rev Dick's (sic) final remark on applying 'better research to making our society prosperous' is tantamount to the sin of passing judgment. My hope is that the book will not only continue to stimulate discussion, but also encourage the more important activity of further research." Wow.

My goal was to celebrate the enslaved. I thought that Dunkley's book was celebrating the enslaved, similar to Richard Hart, who claimed that the enslaved were the main architects of their freedom (See Hart's Slaves Who Abolished Slavery, 1985).

Let us celebrate the enslaved persons' achievements in England and not belittle what they endured in the struggle for freedom.

Rev Devon Dick is pastor of the Boulevard Baptist Church in St Andrew. He is author of 'The Cross and the Machete', and 'Rebellion to Riot'. Send feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com.