Dred Scott
1846 - 1857
Brielyn Howard
Dred Scott's Fight for Freedom
Dred Scott is known for his fight for freedom away from slavery during the Civil War era. He first went to trial to sue for his right to freedom in 1847, and ten years later, after a decade of appeals and court reversals, his case was finally brought before the United States Supreme Court. In what is perhaps the most infamous case in its history, the court decided that all people of African ancestry, slaves as well as those who were free, could never become citizens of the United States and therefore could not sue in federal court. The court also ruled that the federal government did not have the power to prohibit slavery in its territories. Scott, needless to say, remained a slave.
Scott was born around 1800 and migrated westward with his master and owner, Peter Blow. They travelled from Scott's home state of Virginia to Alabama and then, in 1830, to St. Louis, Missouri. Two years later Peter Blow died and Scott was then subsequently bought by army surgeon, Dr. John Emerson, who later took Scott to the free state of Illinois. In the spring of 1836, after a stay of two and a half years, Emerson moved to a fort in the Wisconsin Territory, taking Scott with him. While in Wisconsin, Scott met and married Harriet Robinson, a slave owned by a local justice of the peace and ownership of Harriet was eventually transferred to Emerson.
Scott's extended stay in Illinois gave him the legal standing to make a claim for freedom, as did his extended stay in Wisconsin, where slavery was also prohibited, but unfortunatley, Scott never made the claim while living in the free territories. Perhaps this is because he was unaware of all of his rights at the time, or because he was content with his master. Two years after, the army transferred Emerson to the south, (first to St Louis, then to Louisiana,) and a short time shy of a year later, the recently-married Emerson summoned his slave couple. Instead of staying in the free territory of Wisconsin, or going to the free state of Illinois, the two travelled over a thousand miles, apparently unaccompanied, down the Mississippi River to meet their master. Only after Emerson's death in 1843, after Emerson's widow hired Scott out to an army captain, did Scott seek freedom for himself and his wife. First he offered to buy his freedom from Mrs. Emerson -- then living in St. Louis for $300. The offer was refused, and Scott then sought freedom through the courts.
He then went to trial in June of 1847, but lost on a technicality and couldn't prove that he and Harriet were owned by Emerson's widow. The following year the Missouri Supreme Court decided that case should be retried, and in the 1850 retrial, the the St Louis circuit court ruled that Scott and his family were free. Two years following the case, the Missouri Supreme Court stepped in again, reversing the decision of the lower court. Scott and his lawyers then brought his case to a federal court, the United States Circuit Court in Missouri. In 1854, the Circuit Court upheld the decision of the Missouri Supreme Court. There was now only one other place to go and Scott appealed his case to the United States Supreme Court. The nine justices of the Supreme Court of 1856 certainly had strong biases regarding slavery, seven had been appointed by pro-slavery presidents from the South, and of these, five were from slave-holding families. Still, if the case had gone directly from the state supreme court to the federal supreme court, the federal court certianly would have upheld the state's ruling, citing a previously established decision that gave states the authority to determine the status of its inhabitants. In Scott's attempt to bring his case to the federal courts, he had claimed that he and the case's defendant (Mrs. Emerson's brother, John Sanford, who lived in New York) were citizens from different states. The main issues for the Supreme Court, therefore, were whether it had jurisdiction to try the case and whether Scott was indeed a citizen.
The decision of the court was then read in March of 1857. Chief of Justice, Roger B. Taney, a staunch supporter of slavery then wrote the "majority opinion" for the court. It stated that because Scott was African American he "was not a citizen and therefore had no right to sue." The decision also declared the Missouri Compromise of 1820, legislation which restricted slavery in certain territories, unconstitutional.
While the decision was well-received by slaveholders in the South, many northerners were outraged by these events. The decision greatly influenced the nomination of Abraham Lincoln to the Republican Party and his subsequent election, which in turn led to the South's secession from the Union. Peter Blow's sons, childhood friends of Scott, had helped pay Scott's legal fees through the years. After the Supreme Court's decision, the former master's sons purchased Scott and his wife and then set them free.
Dred Scott is known for his fight for freedom away from slavery during the Civil War era. He first went to trial to sue for his right to freedom in 1847, and ten years later, after a decade of appeals and court reversals, his case was finally brought before the United States Supreme Court. In what is perhaps the most infamous case in its history, the court decided that all people of African ancestry, slaves as well as those who were free, could never become citizens of the United States and therefore could not sue in federal court. The court also ruled that the federal government did not have the power to prohibit slavery in its territories. Scott, needless to say, remained a slave.
Scott was born around 1800 and migrated westward with his master and owner, Peter Blow. They travelled from Scott's home state of Virginia to Alabama and then, in 1830, to St. Louis, Missouri. Two years later Peter Blow died and Scott was then subsequently bought by army surgeon, Dr. John Emerson, who later took Scott to the free state of Illinois. In the spring of 1836, after a stay of two and a half years, Emerson moved to a fort in the Wisconsin Territory, taking Scott with him. While in Wisconsin, Scott met and married Harriet Robinson, a slave owned by a local justice of the peace and ownership of Harriet was eventually transferred to Emerson.
Scott's extended stay in Illinois gave him the legal standing to make a claim for freedom, as did his extended stay in Wisconsin, where slavery was also prohibited, but unfortunatley, Scott never made the claim while living in the free territories. Perhaps this is because he was unaware of all of his rights at the time, or because he was content with his master. Two years after, the army transferred Emerson to the south, (first to St Louis, then to Louisiana,) and a short time shy of a year later, the recently-married Emerson summoned his slave couple. Instead of staying in the free territory of Wisconsin, or going to the free state of Illinois, the two travelled over a thousand miles, apparently unaccompanied, down the Mississippi River to meet their master. Only after Emerson's death in 1843, after Emerson's widow hired Scott out to an army captain, did Scott seek freedom for himself and his wife. First he offered to buy his freedom from Mrs. Emerson -- then living in St. Louis for $300. The offer was refused, and Scott then sought freedom through the courts.
He then went to trial in June of 1847, but lost on a technicality and couldn't prove that he and Harriet were owned by Emerson's widow. The following year the Missouri Supreme Court decided that case should be retried, and in the 1850 retrial, the the St Louis circuit court ruled that Scott and his family were free. Two years following the case, the Missouri Supreme Court stepped in again, reversing the decision of the lower court. Scott and his lawyers then brought his case to a federal court, the United States Circuit Court in Missouri. In 1854, the Circuit Court upheld the decision of the Missouri Supreme Court. There was now only one other place to go and Scott appealed his case to the United States Supreme Court. The nine justices of the Supreme Court of 1856 certainly had strong biases regarding slavery, seven had been appointed by pro-slavery presidents from the South, and of these, five were from slave-holding families. Still, if the case had gone directly from the state supreme court to the federal supreme court, the federal court certianly would have upheld the state's ruling, citing a previously established decision that gave states the authority to determine the status of its inhabitants. In Scott's attempt to bring his case to the federal courts, he had claimed that he and the case's defendant (Mrs. Emerson's brother, John Sanford, who lived in New York) were citizens from different states. The main issues for the Supreme Court, therefore, were whether it had jurisdiction to try the case and whether Scott was indeed a citizen.
The decision of the court was then read in March of 1857. Chief of Justice, Roger B. Taney, a staunch supporter of slavery then wrote the "majority opinion" for the court. It stated that because Scott was African American he "was not a citizen and therefore had no right to sue." The decision also declared the Missouri Compromise of 1820, legislation which restricted slavery in certain territories, unconstitutional.
While the decision was well-received by slaveholders in the South, many northerners were outraged by these events. The decision greatly influenced the nomination of Abraham Lincoln to the Republican Party and his subsequent election, which in turn led to the South's secession from the Union. Peter Blow's sons, childhood friends of Scott, had helped pay Scott's legal fees through the years. After the Supreme Court's decision, the former master's sons purchased Scott and his wife and then set them free.
Works Cited
- "Dread Scott Case: Surpreme Court Decision." Africans In America. Public Broadcasting, 2000. Web. 5 May. 2014.
- Livingston, Nancy. "Dred Scott v. Sandford." OYEZ. Chicago-Kent College of Law, n.d. Web. 5 May. 2014.
- Ehrlich, Eric. "Missouri's Dred Scott Case, 1846-1857." Missouri Digital Heritage. Missouri State Archives, 2006. Web. 5 May. 2014.
- "Dred Scott Biography." Bio. AT&T Television Networks, 2004. Web. 5 May. 2014.