V.
Dred Scott
A presentation presented by Paola Garcia
Sanford
1
History prior to the famous Dred Scott VS.
Sanford case
Scotts wife
• Dred Scott was born a slave between 1795 and 1800 and in 1830 was taken
by his owners to Missouri when a military surgeon, Major John Emerson,
purchased him.
• Over the next 12 years Emerson took Scott along to various forts where he
was assigned.
• He was first stationed at Fort Armstrong in Illinois where the Northwest
Ordinance banned slavery. Then Emerson was stationed at Fort Snelling
where the Missouri Compromise of 1820 had also banned slavery.
• so at for Snelling Emerson allowed Dred to marry a slave named Harriet.
2
History continued…
• In 1837 Dr. Emerson was ordered to Fort
Jessup, Lousiana. There, he married Eliza Irene
Sanford in 1838.
•Emerson then sent for Dred Scott and his wife and on their
way on a steam boat, their first child, Eliza was born on the
Mississippi river between the Iowa Territory and Illinois.
IT’S A
GIRL!!!
•In 1840, Emerson was serving in the Seminole war and
returned to St. Louis in 1842 and returned to St. Louis in
1842 and later died in the Iowa territory in 1843 and his
wife Eliza inherited everything of his including Dred Scott,
his wife and their daughter.
3
First attempt to Sue: Dred Scott VS.
Eliza Irene Emerson
V.
Eliza
Irene
Emerson
• Scott sued Mrs. Emerson for "false imprisonment" in 1846 also claiming
that Emerson held him illegally, and that he had become a free man as soon
as he lived in a free territory or state and then was taken against his will to a
slave territory or state.
• His lawyers also fought for the freedom of his wife and daughter who was
born between a free state and a free territory, therefore should be
considered free too.
•This first trial was then dismissed because Dred failed to present a witness
say that John Emerson was his owner.
•While this was going on, Dred and his wife had another child named Lizzie.
4
Dred Scott V. Eliza Irene Emerson contd…….
• At the end of 1847, the judge granted Scott a new
trial.
• Mrs. Emerson agreed and the trial was scheduled
but did not take place until 1850 due to the cholera
epidemic. (eww)
• The court found that Dred Scott and his family were
legally free but Mrs. Emerson won.
By that time though, she moved to
Massachusetts and transferred the
case to her brother John F, A Sanford.
5
Finally…… Dred Scott V. Sanford
V.
• By 1853, John Sanford was the owner of the Scotts.
• Sanford had moved to New York and left Dred Scott and his family in
Missouri. Since federal courts settle the dispute between citizens of
different states, Scott was able to sue Sanford in federal court in a new
case.
Interesting fact:
•A clerk mistakenly added a letter to Sanford's name, so the case
permanently became Dred Scott v. John F. A. Sandford
(haha funny) 
•At trial in 1854, the federal court directed the jury to rely on Missouri
law to decide Scott's freedom. Since the Missouri Supreme Court had
held Scott was a slave, the jury went towards Sanford’s side. Scott then
appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
6
The CASE GOES SUPREME!!!!!!!
• By the day of his inauguration, he knew
what the outcome of the Supreme Court's
decision would be and took the opportunity
to throw his support to the Court in his
inaugural address saying:
• Before the supreme court made a
decision, president-elect James
Buchanan contacted some of his
friends on the Supreme Court starting
in early February asking if the Court
had reached a decision in the case
because he needed to know what he
should say about the territorial issue
in his inaugural address on March 4.
“A difference of opinion has arisen in regard to the point of
time when the people of a Territory shall decide this question
[of slavery] for themselves.
This is, happily, a matter of but little practical importance.
Besides, it is a judicial question, which legitimately belongs
to the Supreme Court of the United States, before whom it is
now pending, and will, it is understood, be speedily and
finally settled. To their decision, in common with all good
citizens, I shall cheerfully submit, whatever this may be.”
7
Final decision
• The Supreme Court ruling was handed
down on March 6, 1857, just two days
after Buchanan's inauguration.
• The southern Supreme court justices
decided to declare the Missouri
compromise ban on slavery was
unconstitutional but to avoid the
appearance of a decision based on
sectionalism they pressured northern
democratic justice, Robert Grier of
Pennsylvania to accept the decision.
CHEATERS!!!!
•But in total 6 justices agreed with the
decision
Final decision contd….
Chief justice Taney issued the Court’s
ruling stating that congress lacked the
power to keep slavery out of a territory
because slaves were property and the
constitution protects the right of property.
He also wrote that the circuit courts
should not have accepted the Scott case
in the first place because black men
were not citizens of The united States
according to the creators of the
constitution  “beings of an inferior order,
and altogether unfit to associate with the
white race, either in social or political
relations, and so far inferior that they had no
rights which the white man was bound to
respect."
and therefore had no standing in its
courts.
9
Abolitionists became very angry with the
decision of Dred Scott V. Sanford. Although
very disappointed, Frederick Douglass, found a
bright side to the decision and announced, "my
hopes were never brighter than now." For him,
the Dred Scott VS Sanford decision would
bring slavery to the attention of the nation and
was a step toward slavery's ultimate
destruction.
10
What happened to Dred Scott after everything?
The sons of Peter Blow, Scott's first owner, purchased
emancipation for Scott and his family on May 26, 1857.
Their gaining freedom was national news and celebrated in
northern cities.
Scott worked in a hotel in St. Louis, where he was
considered a local celebrity. He died of tuberculosis only
eighteen months later, on November 7, 1858.
How the Dred Scott case moved through the court system
On behalf of himself, his wife, and his
two daughters, Dred Scott sued his
owner in state court to win his
freedom.
Missouri Circuit
Court of St. Louis
County (1850)
Jury decided that
Dred Scott and his
family were free.
Sandford appealed to
a higher state court.
Supreme Court of the United States
(1857)
Scott appealed to highest federal court.
Scott's attorneys wanted to avoid
appealing the Missouri Supreme Court
ruling, because the appeal would go
directly to the Supreme Court of the United
States. The attorneys feared that a
majority of the justices would simply
endorse the state court decision without
considering its merits. They decide to file
the case in federal court as a new case
and not as an appeal. The Court found in
favor of Sanford, and declared African
Americans are not citizens and thus have
no rights.
Missouri Supreme
Court (1852)
Reversed the decision by
the circuit court. Dred
Scott and his family were
not free.
U.S. Court for the District of
Missouri (1854)
Sandford had moved to New
York, leaving Scott in
Missouri. Since federal courts
settle disputes
between citizens of different
states, Scott was able to
sue Sandford in federal court
as a new case. Jury
decides that Dred Scott and
his family were not free.
12
Sources of Information
•
•
•
•
•
•
Google search engine
Wikipedia
PBS.org/wgbh/aia/part4/4h2933.html
Landmarkcases.org/dredscott/home.html
Watson.org
APUSH textbook: Liberty, Equality, Power: A History of The
American People
13