I wrote a new book all about the Supreme Court. Order your copy today! [ Ссылка ]

Patreon: [ Ссылка ]
Mr. Beat's band: [ Ссылка ]
Mr. Beat on Twitter: [ Ссылка ]

In episode 11 of Supreme Court Briefs, a slave fights for his family's freedom after they live in free states for a while.

Check out cool primary sources here:
[ Ссылка ]

Additional sources:

[ Ссылка ]

[ Ссылка ]

[ Ссылка ]

[ Ссылка ]

St. Louis, Missouri
Some time between 1830 and 1833

Dr. John Emerson, an United States Army surgeon, buys a slave named Dred Scott. Emerson moved around a lot, and he always took Scott with him. In 1836, Emerson moved to Fort Armstrong, Illinois, taking Scott with him of course. Interestingly, Missouri was a state where slavery was legal, but in Illinois it was not.

The next year, Emerson moved again, this time to the territory of Wisconsin (which is now in the state of Minnesota), where slavery was also illegal. While there, Dred Scott fell in love and married Harriet Robinson, another slave owned by a dude named Lawrence Taliaferro.

Emerson ended up moving back to Missouri again shortly after this, leaving Dred and Harriet behind and leasing them out to other army officers.

Well guess what? Emerson fell in love, too. He met a chick named Eliza Irene Sanford, who went by Irene, after he moved down to Louisiana for a bit. Hey I told you he moved a lot. Emerson married Sanford in Louisiana, and soon after asked Dred and Harriet to join him again. Harriet was pregnant and ended up having the baby on the trip down somewhere between Illinois and Wisconsin, in free territory. The Emersons and Scotts returned to Missouri a couple years later.

John Emerson died in 1843, and Irene inherited his estate and the Scott family. However, for the next three years, Dred and Harriet Scott were hired out to different people. Dred and Harriet first tried to buy their freedom, but that didn’t work. So on April 6, 1846, the Scotts, with some help from legal advisors, sued Irene Emerson to obtain freedom from slavery. By this time, they had two kids. What’s crazy is that the Scotts were able to pay for it due to the family of Dred Scott’s previous owner helping out. The Scotts went through three lawyers over a 14-month period, but ultimately lost the case due to a technicality. Dred and Harriet Scott could not prove they were actually Irene Emerson’s slaves. However, the Scotts lawyers were able to get them a second trial. Due to a major fire, a cholera epidemic, and several other delays, that trial didn’t begin until January 1850. In this trial, they were able to prove that they were Emerson’s slaves.The jury favored the Scotts, granting them their freedom. Yay!

Hold up. Not so fast, Emerson’s lawyers said. After all, Emerson would be losing four slaves, worth a lot of money. Her lawyers asked for a new trial, but they were denied. So then they appealed to the Missouri Supreme Court, who reversed the decision, arguing the Scotts were still slaves and they should have sued for freedom when they had the chance back when they lived in a free state.

Well dang, so the Scotts were still slaves. But this saga isn’t over yet. Dred Scott sued again, on November 2, 1853, this time in federal court. For this suit, a lawyer named Roswell Field agreed to help free of charge. Except, this time, he wasn’t suing Emerson. He was suing her brother, John Sanford, who now claimed ownership of him. Aw how sweet, she gave him a gift. What a nice sister. Scott also alleged that Sanford assaulted his family. The judge went with Sanford because of the Missouri Supreme Court decision that said the Scotts were still slaves. Field was determined to get this one to the Supreme Court, though, as he wanted to settle the question: “did living in a free state or territory permanently free a slave?” The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case, but not until February 1856. Keep in mind this is 10 YEARS after the Scotts first sued for freedom. Just Dred officially filed, with the implication his family would be freed as well if they sided with him. It became known as Dred Scott v. Sandford. Wait...SANDford? Yep, even though John Sanford’s name was, you know, Sanford, a clerk misspelled his name in court records and it stayed that way.

The Supreme Court justices argued the case multiple times the rest of the year, finally giving a decision on March 6, 1857. The Court ruled 7-2 in favor of Sanford. One final time, Dred Scott and his family were denied their freedom.

#supremecourtbriefs #apush #dredscottdecision

свернуть