▁the ▁statement ▁" that ▁England ▁has ▁too ▁pure ▁an ▁air ▁for ▁a ▁slave ▁to ▁bre at he ▁in ." ▁ ▁Nor ▁did ▁it ▁refer ▁to ▁the ▁two ▁dec isions ▁of ▁Lord ▁Hol t ▁( Ch am ber lain ▁v ▁Har vey ▁and ▁Smith ▁v ▁G ould ) ▁which ▁led ▁to ▁so ▁much ▁of ▁the ▁controvers y . ▁ ▁After math ▁Y or ke ▁subsequently ▁end ors ed ▁the ▁views ▁expressed ▁in ▁the ▁opinion ▁( although ▁not ▁express ly ▁referring ▁to ▁it ) ▁whilst ▁sitting ▁in ▁his ▁jud icial ▁capacity ▁as ▁Lord ▁Chan cell or ▁in ▁Pear ne ▁v ▁Lis le ▁( 1 7 4 9 ) ▁Amb ▁ 7 5 , ▁ 2 7 ▁ER ▁ 4 7 . ▁However , ▁in ▁ 1 7 7 2 , ▁Lord ▁Mans field ▁held ▁that ▁no ▁person ▁could ▁be ▁for ci b ly ▁removed ▁from ▁England ▁as ▁a ▁slave ▁in ▁England ▁in ▁Som ers ett ' s ▁case ▁on ▁application ▁for ▁habe as ▁cor pus ▁made ▁on ▁beh alf ▁of ▁the ▁escaped ▁slave , ▁James ▁Som ers ett . ▁Yet ▁mind ful ▁of ▁Hard w ic ke ' s ▁holding ▁in ▁Pear ne ▁v ▁Lis le ▁that ▁English ▁law ▁would ▁apply ▁throughout ▁the ▁British ▁Empire , ▁and ▁conscious ▁of ▁the ▁economic ▁ru in ▁which ▁the ▁sudden ▁abol ition ▁of ▁sla very ▁would ▁cause ▁in ▁the ▁colon ies , ▁Mans field ▁limited ▁his ▁r uling ▁territorial ly . ▁ ▁Ult imately ▁sla very ▁would ▁be ▁abol ished ▁by ▁stat ute ▁in ▁both ▁England ▁and ▁throughout ▁the