ipl-logo

History Of Dred Scott Vs Sanford

747 Words3 Pages

Dred Scott vs. Sanford is a Supreme Court case landmark. About a man born into slavery and taken to a free state and fight for his freedom. It is important to learn and understand about its History, background, constitutional issue, and current impact.
There are many historical facts about the Dred Scott court case. Peter Blow was Dred Scott’s master since birth. They moved from Virginia to Alabama and then in 1830 he moved to St. Louis, Missouri. When peter blow die d he was bought off to an army surgeon Dr. John Emerson .Who later took him to the free state of Illinois. After 2 ½ years in 1836 Scott and Emerson moved to a fort in Wisconsin Territory where he met and married his wife Harriet Robinson. Harriet owner transferred her to Emerson. …show more content…

Dred Scott was born a slave around 1795. His parents and his older brother were also slaves own by Peter Blow. They relocated to Huntsville, Alabama to St. Louis Missouri. 1836 when Scott was owned by Dr. John Emerson he fell in love with the 19 year old Harriet Robinson who was 15 years younger and was owned by another doctor. Her Ownership was transferred to Emerson. April 1838 Harriet was pregnant. Harriet gave birth in the free waters and Eliza Scott was born. In St. Louis Scott worked for various people while the Emerson’s collected wages. Around this time their second daughter was born Lizzie Scott. When Emerson Died neither Dred nor Harriet was in his will but Mrs. Emerson took them as her property anyway. They moved in with Mrs. Emerson’s proslavery father. They worked for other people for a while Mrs. Emerson collected the wages. Scott then offered $300 dollars for him and his family’s freedom and when she declined he sued. This is when the Dred Scott case happened. September 17 1858 Dred Scott got tuberculosis and died. Because of his famous freedom lawsuit he was known by lots of people.
Scott Didn’t get his freedom through the courts like he expected there was a lot of constitutional issues. A man named Roger Taney under Articles 3 and 4. No one but a citizen of the United States can be a citizen of a state. Roger Taney stated that no one that was descend

Show More
Related

  • Roger B. Taney's History In The 1857 Dred Scott Case

    561 Words  | 3 Pages

    Roger Brooke Taney made history in the 1857 Dred Scott Case by ruling that black slaves were not citizens of the United States. This controversial historical figure died on October 12, 1864, in Washington, D.C. One of Robert’s most famous quotes was "What Dred Scott's master might lawfully do with Dred Scott, in the free state of Illinois, every other master may lawfully do with any other one, or 1,000 slaves, in Illinois, or in any other free state. "What Robert is saying is that a master of a slave can do whatever he/she wants with that slave. By the time Roger B Taney became Chief Justice, Taney had become a staunch supporter of slavery, even though he had manumitted eleven slaves he inherited as a young man and made anti-slavery statements when serving as defense

    Read More

  • History Of The Antislavery Case: Somerset V. Stewart

    344 Words  | 2 Pages

    To first understand why Mr. Dred Scott decided to sue for his freedom, we have to understand the prelude to his story. Even before Dred Scott was born a case in London was buzzing that would emancipate slaves and some historians believe the case contributed to increasing colonial support for separatism in the Thirteen Colonies of British North America, by parties on both sides of the slavery question who wanted to establish independent government and law (Britannica). The case was Somerset v. Stewart and it has been deemed one of the most important legal actions in the history of the antislavery movement (Weiner 71). The facts of the case were that James Somerset was a slave of Charles Stewart, an officer in the British colony of Boston in

    Read More

  • Dred Scott V. John F. A. Sandford Case Summary

    961 Words  | 4 Pages

    Emerson, a surgeon in the army. He stayed in Illinois as Dr. Emerson’s slave until 1836. They continued on to Fort Snelling in Upper Louisiana until 1938. Dr. Emerson gave permission for Dred to marry his wife Harriet in 1836at Fort Snelling. The Doctor then moved Dred, Harriet and their daughter to Missouri in 1838.

    Read More

  • Why Shouldn T Dred Scott Be Banned To Slavery?

    246 Words  | 1 Pages

    In 1833, Dred Scott was purchased as a slave by John Emerson, an army surgeon who was moved from Missouri, the place he was bought, to a base in the Wisconsin Territory. However, under the Missouri Compromise of 1820, slavery was banned there, making the area a “free” state. Nonetheless, Scott continued to work as a laborer for Emerson for the next four years, and was a hired hand whenever the surgeon would go out of town for business. After moving around with Emerson, as well as his family, Scott was willed to Emerson’s wife Eliza Irene Stanford after his owner’s death in 1843. Eliza refused to set the Scott family free after they wished to purchase their freedom, causing Dred Scott to sue her in a state court, alleging that he was free under

    Read More

  • Dred Scott Vs Sanford Case Study

    455 Words  | 2 Pages

    His goal by doing this was to officially earn his and his family’s freedom and leave the Emerson family. Scott’s lawyers argued that by moving him to a free state and by becoming a free man there, that he would always be a free man now. Scott had reason to believe that he would win the case because similar cases had gone through the Supreme Court before and they had ruled in the slave, or former slave’s

    Read More

  • The Case Of Dred Scott Vs Sandford

    770 Words  | 4 Pages

    Dred Scott was a slave for Dr.John Emerson , while traveling with Dr.Emerson Dred Scott was taken into the free state of Illinois. In 1836 , after staying in Illinois for two and a half years , Dr.Emerson decided to move to Wisconsin with Dred Scott. Dred Scott's stay in Illinois and Wisconsin both being places where slavery is prohibited , were chances for Scott to to make a claim to the court in the free states. After Dr.Emerson had died in 1843 , Dr.Emerson’s wife took over Scott and his wife. Dred Scott offered to buy his wife’s and his own freedom from Mrs.Emerson for $300.

    Read More

  • The Missouri Compromise: Dred Scott's Fight For Freedom

    237 Words  | 1 Pages

    Dred Scott, slave of army surgeon John Emerson, had travelled with Emerson from Missouri to several states including Minnesota. The Missouri Compromise declared Minnesota a free state. After returning to Missouri, Scot sued for his freedom based on the grounds that he had previously lived in a free state. When the case reached the supreme court, the court ruled that living in a free state for a period of time did not make Scott a free man, that the Missouri compromise was unconstitutional because Congress did not have the right to prohibit slavery in any territory as that violated the 5th amendment, and finally that as a black man, Scott was excluded from citizenship and could not bring suit Abraham Lincoln was Republican candidate in the

    Read More

  • The Case Of Dred Scott V. Sandford

    513 Words  | 3 Pages

    Dred Scott was a dedicated man who stood strongly for his declaration of independence. Dred Scott was an enslaved African American man who had been taken by his owner, Dr. John Emerson, to Free states and territories with his wife Harriet Scott and later attempted to sue for his own and families freedom. The Case is known as Dred Scott vs. Sandford or the “Dred Scott Decision.” Dred Scott was born around 1795, in Southampton County, Virginia. His parents were slaves so as a child he was raised into a home of slavery.

    Read More

  • How Did Dred Scott Stand Up For Freedom

    265 Words  | 2 Pages

    Have you ever heard of Dred Scott?He was a brave african american , he sued his owner for his freedom in 1857.Dred Scott was an example to other slaves to stand up for their freedom. First of , Dred Scott 's early life . Born in Virginia in 1799 as a slave of the peter Bowl family . He was a slave because he was in a slave state . After Bows moved to St.Louis Dred was sold to Dr.John Emerson.

    Read More

  • Dred Scott Vs Ferguson Plessy

    367 Words  | 2 Pages

    This one particular case Dred Scott vs Sanford. It is about Dred Scott being born in Virginia, and was a slave. His owner moved to Alabama, and took him with him, then sold him to a guy that moved with Dred Scott to Illinois witch was a slave free state but he wasn 't free,so he fought for it. The slave may have won if they hadn 't made the Missouri compromise,witch ruled against him. Junius P. Rodriguez says it is

    Read More

  • Why Was Dred Scott Considered Free

    873 Words  | 4 Pages

    Louis, Missouri by his owners in 1830. In the following years soon after moving he was sold to Dr. John Emerson. With his owner being an army doctor they traveled very frequently, leading Dred Scott into many placed against the idea of slavery. For seven years, he lived in slave free territories. After the death of his owner John Emerson, he was then considered property of Emerson’s wife.

    Read More

  • The Dred Scott Decision And Bleeding Kansas

    756 Words  | 4 Pages

    Dred Scott was born was a slave in the state of Virginia and was owned by Peter Blow, who died in 1832. Scott only had two masters after Blow’s death; one lived in Wisconsin and later Illinois, both of which prohibited slavery, yet, Scott didn’t petition for freedom. Instead he met his wife Harriet. The two met their new master in Louisiana, who did not grant them freedom, so Scott looked for legal action to escape his slavery. Over a period of seven years, he went through trial and retrial until he was denied his final freedom in 1854.

    Read More

  • Dred Scott Decision Research Paper

    359 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Dred Scott decision of 1865 consisted of several implications on the status of free blacks in the United States, as well as concept of popular sovereignty, and the future of slavery in America. however, I believe the implications of the Dred Scott decision was for the status of free blacks in the United States due to the impacts it caused and the questions it rose. First of all, Dred Scott was an enslaved African American man from Missouri who moved in with his master Peter Blow, in Illinois, a free state. Dred Scott unsuccessfully fought for his freedom by claiming that being a resident in a free state made him a free man. However, in supreme court it was ruled that because blacks can not be recognized as citizens, they did not have

    Read More

  • Supreme Court Case Essay

    537 Words  | 3 Pages

    Dred Scott was sued for his freedom on the grounds that he had lived for a time in a "free" territory. The Court ruled against him, saying that under the Constitution, he was his master 's property. The people involved with this court case are the Supreme Court,Dred Scott, and Chief Justice Roger B. The final judgment for this case ended up in Dred Scott 's favor.

    Read More

  • Cause Of The Civil War Essay

    685 Words  | 3 Pages

    Dred Scott was a slave who attempted to gain his freedom. Scott was owned by a man for the early part of his life, and then was sold to a new man once his original owner died (Tindall 672). He followed his new owner around the country, and lived in several free states (Tindall 672). Once his second owner died, Scott filed for his freedom (Tindall 672). After going through a rigorous process, the court finally decided that Scott had no grounds for his case because he was not actually a citizen (Tindall 672).

    Read More

More about History Of Dred Scott Vs Sanford

Open Document