Dred Scott v. Sandford
A Claim for Freedom
Dred Scott was a slave owned by U.S. Army surgeon Dr. John Emerson. Emersons duties required him to relocate to Illinois and then the Wisconsin territory before eventually returning to Missouri and eventually Louisiana. While Emerson returned to slave states, he left Scott behind with his wife in Wisconsin where he was hired out for work. Upon the death of Dr. Emerson, Scott's ownership was transferred to Emerson's widow Irene Sandford.
When Sandford denied his request to purchase the freedom of his self and his wife, Dred Scott went to court to sue for his freedom in 1847 on the grounds that his residency in the free state of Illinois and the free territory Wisconsin nullified his slavery.
For ten years his case bounced back and forth through the court system in both Missouri and the federal courts before finally reaching the United States Supreme Court in 1857. Its decision had far reaching implications in American history.
When Sandford denied his request to purchase the freedom of his self and his wife, Dred Scott went to court to sue for his freedom in 1847 on the grounds that his residency in the free state of Illinois and the free territory Wisconsin nullified his slavery.
For ten years his case bounced back and forth through the court system in both Missouri and the federal courts before finally reaching the United States Supreme Court in 1857. Its decision had far reaching implications in American history.
* * * Discussion Questions * * *
1. What two landmark precedents were established in the Dred Scott decision?
2. What evidence did Taney provide for his opinion of the intent of the Constitutional Founders?
3. What was Abraham Lincoln's rationale for disagreeing with Taney's reasoning?
2. What evidence did Taney provide for his opinion of the intent of the Constitutional Founders?
3. What was Abraham Lincoln's rationale for disagreeing with Taney's reasoning?
The Dred Scott Decision
The Supreme Court ruled against Scott in a 7-2 decision written by Chief Justice Roger Taney. It was a landmark decision that strongly supported state rights and effectively eliminated any hope for equality or even emancipation for slaves and crushed the aspirations of the abolitionists. Taney's decision consisted two landmark declarations.
1) Blacks "are not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word 'citizens' in the Constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States." 2) Congress did not possess the Constitutional power to limit or outlaw slavery. The entire Missouri Compromise was overruled! |
Reactions
For those who were pro-slavery, the Dred Scott decision was viewed as an end to the slave debate. The issue was now removed from the grasp of the federal government and could only be resolve at the state level.
For those who opposed slavery, it fueled an increased intensity and desire for action to be taken. But what action could be taken short of violence?
Nearly ten years later, the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the Constitution overruled the Dred Scott decision and eliminated the Constitutional stain of slavery.
For those who opposed slavery, it fueled an increased intensity and desire for action to be taken. But what action could be taken short of violence?
Nearly ten years later, the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the Constitution overruled the Dred Scott decision and eliminated the Constitutional stain of slavery.
Abraham Lincoln and Frederick Douglass strongly rejected the Dred Scott decision. According to Lincoln, the Taney decision established "two propositions-first, that a negro cannot sue in the U.S. Courts; and secondly, that Congress cannot prohibit slavery in the Territories". Both the Court's rationale and the facts used to support that rationale were called into question by Lincoln. Where Taney stated that blacks were not and had never been a part of the American government, Lincoln countered that at the time of the Constitution, "These colored persons were not only included in the body of `the people of the United States,- by whom the Constitution was ordained and established; but in at least five of the States they had the power to act, and, doubtless, did act, by their suffrages, upon the question of its adoption.”
Lincoln advanced the theory that the founders clearly included the whole of making when state "that all men are created equal". According to him, the Founders established the "unalienable right" expecting civil and political rights to be established was society progressed.
Lincoln advanced the theory that the founders clearly included the whole of making when state "that all men are created equal". According to him, the Founders established the "unalienable right" expecting civil and political rights to be established was society progressed.
Secondary Sources
|
|