ipl-logo

The Case Of Dred Scott Vs Sandford

770 Words4 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. When his offer was denied , Dred decided to make a case in the court. His case was tried in a court twice , the first trial was from February 11-14, 1856 , the second …show more content…

Sandford was taken to a federal court , the people on the jury were Roger Taney , James Wayne , John Catron , Peter Daniel , Samuel Nelson , Robert Grier , John Campbell , John McLean , and Benjamin Curtis. During the trial , Dred Scott used the 5th amendment as his defence stating that the 5th amendment is supposed to prohibit the misuse of power undertaken by the government.The final verdict of the court was given on March 6, 1857. Scott’s claim was overlooked , since seven of the justices agreed that Scott was not even considered a citizen since he was a slave , so he couldn’t even make a court case. Roger Taney , James Wayne , John Catron , Peter Daniel , Samuel Nelson , Robert Grier , and John Campbell all voted in favor of Sandford , and John Mclean and Benjamin Curtis voted in favor of Dred …show more content…

What the 13th amendment did was make slavery illegal in the United States , how the Dred Scott case had an effect on this was that when Northerners had heard about this they were upset about how he had lived in Illinois , one of their free states , as a slave. The fact that Dred Scott lost his case because he was not considered a citizen , so therefore he could not make a case in the first place , is one of the things that lead to the 14th amendment. The 14th amendment gave all people equal protection under the constitution , so if something similar to Dred Scott’s case were to happen it would not matter what race or history that person had , they now have the right equal and fair

Show More
Related
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
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
394 Words | 2 Pages

The Missouri Supreme Court was ready to hear the case on April 3rd 1848, judge William Scott issued a unanimous decision on June 30th 1848 that “no final judgment upon which a writ of error can only lie”. The case was still just a suit for freedom. On March 17th 1848 Mrs. Emerson had the sheriff of St. Louis County take charge of the Scotts. He hired them out and maintained the wages until the trial was over; they were under his custody until March 1857.

Read More
757 Words | 4 Pages

The witness goes on to argue that due to the fact that Dred Scott was part of a free state, that he has the right to be considered free. In response, the Supreme Court questioned if Dred Scott was still in a free state, which the witness answered with a negative. Then the court inquired if property could sue its’ owner, which again was replied to with a negative response. In conclusion, the Supreme Court and the defence witness debated the difference between a slave suing and a horse suing their owners. Once the defence witness took a seat, the next witness for prosecution made their argument.

Read More
747 Words | 3 Pages

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.

Read More
1324 Words | 6 Pages

During the year of 1857 the Dred Scott case was investigated through the Supreme Court of the United States. The relationship between the North and South became chaotic. The North understood the necessity of slavery for the Southern states because of the circumstances involving farming, acres of land, and beliefs; however, the North did not have the same need.   The Supreme Court's ruling of African Americans denied them U.S. citizenship as well as the right of freedom because of their classification as slaves.

Read More
265 Words | 2 Pages

When a slave master moves the slave has to move to . Secondly , Dred scott moving to a free state. John Emerson took Dred Scott to a free state of Illinois . Emerson moved to a fort in Wisconsin territory taking Scott along .

Read More
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
731 Words | 3 Pages

The state attracted citizens from both the North and the South, causing the disagreements of the opposing sides to become more evident. By the year 1855, issues emerged when proslavery and antislavery settlers were competing in order to outnumber one another in votes. Two years later, divisions between the North and South grew even stronger when the Supreme Court took on the case of Dred Scott. Scott, who was an African American slave, sued for his freedom after his masters had traveled with him to a free state. The Court, ruled by Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, came to the conclusion that Scott was not a free man because he was property and it would be unconstitutional to take the property of a citizen.

Read More
73 Words | 1 Pages

Dred Scott was a slave in Missouri, but from 1833-1843, he lived in places where slavery was illegal. When Scott returned to Missouri, he believed that because he lived in free territory, he was a free man. He sued without success in Missouri courts. Scott’s master said that Dred Scott couldn’t be a citizen because of Article III of the Constitution. In the end, Dred Scott lost and had to return to slavery.

Read More
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
1004 Words | 5 Pages

Savannah Gitchel Mrs. Hodges-Bond Cambridge US History 3 October 2016 Meeting of the Minds Dred Scott The Dred Scott v. Sandford case was a pivotal point in leading America to civil war. The Supreme Court stated that even though Scott was in a free state, he was still the property of his owner and had to remain that way. Abolitionists were angered even further by this decision, whether they wanted complete abolishment, or just to stop the spread of slavery into the North. Reversely, the south was overjoyed with the decision.

Read More
825 Words | 4 Pages

Illinois was a free state where they lived for two years and a half years. Dred did not know he could sue for his freedom while he was living in the free state of Illinois. In 1836 Dred Scott met Harriet Robinson at Fort Snelling in the Wisconsin Territory. Harriet was owned by Major Lawrence Toliaferro.

Read More
1437 Words | 6 Pages

In 1846, an enslaved black man Dred Scott and his wife Harriet, sued for their freedom. They sued because they believed they were free due to living in a free territory where slavery was not allowed. This was thought to be a straightforward case, but it ended up being a 11 year legal struggle. Dred Scott did end up losing the case, and the case built and actually reached the supreme court. The case grew interest as slavery became one of the biggest issues in American politics.

Read More
450 Words | 2 Pages

In 1845, Scott sued his master’s widow for freedom on the grounds that the laws in Illinois and the Wisconsin Territory barred slavery. The case was dismissed by Chief Justice Roger Taney of Maryland (who apparently came from a slave state) on the basis that black people where not citizens, therefore Dredd Scott was not an American citizen and he had no right to sue and that because he was a slave, he was so inferior that he had no rights that the white man was bound to respect. This decision was very unsettling to the thousands of free slaves especially in the south because by stripping them of their citizenship the court had made them vulnerable to reenslavement or expulsion. To the blacks, the enemy was no longer the enemy, but the very government from which they had hoped for

Read More

More about The Case Of Dred Scott Vs Sandford

Related Topics

Open Document