In 1781, the captain of the slave ship Zong ordered 132 enslaved people thrown overboard to their deaths. The case became a watershed moment in the British abolitionist movement.
On 29 November 1781, the captain of the British slave ship Zong — Luke Collingwood — ordered the massacre of 132 enslaved Africans by throwing them into the sea. The ship was travelling from Africa to Jamaica and was running dangerously short of water after navigational errors had lengthened the voyage. Collingwood calculated that if the enslaved people died of thirst, the ship’s owners could not claim insurance on the lost cargo; but if they were thrown overboard as a deliberate act to preserve the ship, a claim could be made under maritime insurance law.
The massacre was carried out in three groups on successive days. Some of those thrown into the sea managed to grab hold of ropes and climb back aboard, only to be thrown overboard again. The exact number of deaths — estimates range from 130 to 142 — reflects the incomplete records kept of people treated as property rather than human beings.
The Insurance Case
The ship’s owners duly claimed insurance on the 132 enslaved people who had been thrown overboard. The initial arbitration found in the owners’ favour. The underwriters appealed, and the case was heard before the Court of King’s Bench in 1783, where Lord Chief Justice Mansfield ruled in favour of the underwriters — not on the grounds that the massacre was a crime, but on the grounds that the water shortage had not been as severe as claimed, and therefore the killing had not been legally “necessary.”
The case was, in formal legal terms, simply a commercial dispute. The enslaved people who died were treated throughout as cargo, not as victims of homicide. No criminal charges were ever brought in connection with the massacre.
Abolitionists’ Response
The abolitionist Granville Sharp attended the 1783 hearing and was appalled by what he witnessed. He attempted to bring murder charges but was unable to compel the authorities to act. He did, however, ensure that the case was publicised as widely as possible, recognising its power as an indictment of the slave trade. Sharp wrote to the Prime Minister, the Admiralty and the newspapers; the case was reported across Europe and North America.
The Zong massacre became one of the most powerful arguments in the abolitionist arsenal. JMW Turner’s painting *The Slave Ship* (1840) — depicting chained Africans drowning in a stormy sea as sharks circle — is traditionally interpreted as a response to the Zong case, though painted nearly sixty years later; Turner was likely responding to a re-publication of the account in 1839. The painting is now in the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston.
A Continuing Resonance
The Zong massacre is part of the curriculum of any honest account of the slave trade, and its legacy continues to resonate. It demonstrates with devastating clarity the logic of chattel slavery: that enslaved people were property, subject to the financial calculations of their owners, with no legal standing as human beings. The case is cited in contemporary discussions of corporate accountability, maritime law and the historical basis for reparations claims against Britain.
