近世・近代の奴隷制度　　 　 　　 back to the TOP PAGE
（１）　西インド諸島の奴隷制度
（２）　北アメリカの奴隷制度
　（ａ）　北部諸州の奴隷制度
　（ｂ）　南部諸州の奴隷制度（イギリス植民地）
　（ｃ）　ルイジアナ（フランス系）の奴隷制度
　 　　Code Noir (1724)
　　　1803 Louisiana Purchase　（アメリカ領New Orleans領となる）
　　　1806 Louisiana のBlack Code
　　　1812　ルイジアナが州に昇格　
　　　1825年のルイジアナ民法典　（原典は、コロンビア大学ロースクール所蔵本）、奴隷に関する規定あり
　（抜粋）第１編　人　第１章　人の区別
３５条　奴隷とは、それが属する主人の権力のもとに置かれる者である。主人は、これを売却し、またはその身体、役務、労働を処分することができる。奴隷は、いかなる行為をすることもできず、物を所有することもできない。また、主人に帰属することになる物を取得することのほか、何物をも取得することができない。
３６条　解放された者(manumitted persons)とは、かつて奴隷であった者で、法的に自由にされたものである。
３７条　時間的に限定された奴隷または自由となる権利を有する奴隷(statu liberi)とは、将来の一定の時期に自由になる権利を有するが、まだその条件が成就せず、または一定の出来事が発生せず、そのために、それまでの間、奴隷の身分にある者である。
３８条　自由人とは、自然の自由を有し、法律で禁止されないことであれば自由にこれを行うことができる者である。
　　　第６章　主人と従者　第３節　奴隷
１７２条　この州において、奴隷に関して守られるべき行為および治安についての規則、および奴隷の犯罪と刑罰は、州の立法府が定める特別法において規律される。
１７３条　奴隷は、全面的に主人の意思に従い、主人は、奴隷を矯正し、懲戒することができる。但し、度を超えた厳しさで罰したり、奴隷を不具にしたり、手足を切断したり、生命の危険にさらしたり、死に至らしたらしめたりしてはならない。
１７４条　奴隷は、自己の解放(emancipation)に関する行為のほか、いかなる種類の契約もすることができない。
１７５条　奴隷が占有するものは全て主人に属す。奴隷は、固有の物は何も所有することができない。但し、主人が所有することを認めた一定額の金銭または動産からなる特別の財産(peculium)は、別である。
　　　
＊　　詳細については、拙稿「人の権利能力ーー平等と差別の法的構造序説」平井古希記念論集を参照.

（4）　ヨーロッパ各国の対応
　（ａ）　イングランド
　　サマーセット事件（１７７２年）
　　（事実関係）　アメリカ・ヴァージニアの住人Stewartは、その所有する黒人奴隷Somersetを連れてイングランドに来たところ、サマーセットが逃亡。再び捕らえられ、国外に連れ出されそうになったところ、黒人解放運動の活動家が裁判所に人身保護命令の発給を申請、裁判所がこれを発令したため、サマーセットは一旦解放され、裁判所で果たして不当な拘束があったかどうかが審理されることになった。マンスフィールド卿による裁判。
　Mr. Hargrave（Somerset側代理人の弁論）.　The importance of the question will I hope justify to your Lordships the solicitude with which I rise to defend it; and however unequal I feel myself, will command attention. I trust, indeed, this is a cause sufficient to support my own unworthiness by its single intrinsic merit. I shall endeavour to state the grounds from which Mr. Stewart's supposed right arises; and then offer, as appears to me, sufficient confutation to his claim over the negro, as property, after having him brought over to England; (an absolute and unlimited property, or as right accruing from contract;) Mr. Stewart insists on the former. The question on that is not whether slavery is lawful in the colonies, (where a concurrence of unhappy circumstances has caused it to be established as necessary;) but whether in England? Not whether it ever has existed in England; but whether it be not now abolished? 　・・・・・（中略）・・・・・
.　The humanity of modern times has much mitigated this extreme rigour of slavery; shall an attempt to introduce perpetual servitude here to this island hope for countenance? Will not all the other mischiefs of mere utter servitude revive, if once the idea of absolute property, under the immediate sanction of the laws of this country, extend itself to those who have been brought over to a soil whose air is deemed too pure for slaves to breathe in it; but the laws, the genius and spirit of the constitution, forbid the approach of slavery; will not suffer it's existence here. This point, I conceive, needs no further enlargement: I mean, the proof of our mild and just constitution is inadapted to the reception of arbitrary maxims and practices.
　・・・・（中略）・・・・Lord Holt（先例）.-As soon as a slave enters England he becomes free. Stanley and Harvey, on a bequest to a slave; by a person whom he had served some years by his former master's permission, the master claims the bequest; Lord Northington decides for the slave, and gives him costs. 29th of George the 2d, c. 31, implies permission in America, unhappily thought necessary; but the same reason subsists not here in England.
The local law（ここではアメリカ法のこと） be admitted when no very great inconvenience would follow; but otherwise not. The right of the master depends on the condition of slavery (such as it is) in America. If the slave he brought hither, it has nothing left to depend on but a supposed contract of the slave to return; which yet the law of England cannot permit. Thus has been traced the only mode of slavery ever been established here, villenage, long expired; I hope it has shewn, the introducing new kinds of slavery has been cautiously, and, we trust, effectually guarded against by the same laws.

Mr. Alleyne.（サマーセット側代理人）　（いい弁論だが省略）.
Mr. Wallace.（Stewart側代理人）（略）
Mr. Dunning.(Stewart側代理人）（以下に見るように、Stewart側の代理人としては歯切れが悪い） ・・・（冒頭部分略）・・・・For myself, I would not be understood to intimate a wish in favour of slavery, by any means; nor on the other side, to be supposed maintainer of an opinion contrary to my own judgment. I am bound by duty to maintain those arguments which are most useful to Captain Knowles(サマーセットを連れ戻そうとした船の船長）, as far as is consistent with truth; and if his conduct has been agreeable to the laws throughout, I am under a farther indispensable duty to support it. I ask no other attention than may naturally result from the importance of the question: less than this I have no reason to expect; more, I neither demand nor wish to have allowed. Many alarming apprehensions have been entertained of the consequence of the decision, either way. About 14,000 slaves, from the most exact intelligence I am able to procure are at present here; and some little time past,166,914 in Jamaica; 　・・・（中略）・・・ if the relation in which they stand to their masters is utterly to be dissolved on the instant of their coming into England. Slavery, say the gentlemen, is an odious thing; the name is: and the reality; if it were as one has defined, and the rest supposed it. If it were necessary to the idea and the existence of James Somerset, that his master, even here, might kill, nay, might eat him, might sell living or dead, might make him and his descendants property alienable, and thus transmissible to posterity; this, how high soever my ideas may be of the duty of my profession, is what I should decline pretty much to defend or assert, for any purpose, seriously; I should only speak of it to testify my contempt and abhorrence. But this is what at present I am not at all concerned in unless Captain Knowles, or Mr. Stewart, have killed or eat him. Freedom has been asserted as a natural right, and therefore unalienable and unrestrainable; there is perhaps no branch of this right, but in some at all times, and in all places at different times, has been restrained: nor could society otherwise be conceived to exist. For the great benefit of the public and individuals, natural liberty, which consists in doing what one likes, is altered to the doing what one ought. ・・・（中略）・・・the municipal regulations of one country are not binding on another; but does the relation cease where the modes of creating it, the degrees in which it subsists, vary? I have not heard, nor, I fancy, is there any intention to affirm, the relation of master and servant ceases here? I understand the municipal relations differ in different colonies, according to humanity, and otherwise. ・・・・（以下略）・・・
（June 22, 1772）.
Lord Mansfield.（裁判官）（分かりにくいが、サマーセットは解放されるべきことを決定）（冒頭部分略）　We are so well agreed, that we think there is no occasion of having it argued (as I intimated an intention at first,) before all the Judges, as is usual, for obvious reasons, on a return to a habeas corpus; the only question before this is, whether the cause on the return is sufficient? If it is, the negro must be remanded; if it is not, he must be discharged. Accordingly, the return states, that the slave departed and refused to serve; whereupon he was kept, to be sold abroad. So high an act of dominion must be recognized by the law of the country where it is used. The power of a master over his slave has been extremely different, in different countries. The state of slavery is of such a nature, that it is incapable of being introduced on any reasons, moral or political; but only positive law, which preserves its force long after the reasons, occasion, and time itself from whence it was created, is erased from memory: it's so odious, that nothing can be suffered to support it, but positive law. Whatever inconveniences, therefore, may follow from a decision, I cannot say this case is allowed or approved by the law of England; and therefore the black must be discharged.