Dred Scott

Dred Scott v. Sandford

Dred Scott was born a slave in the state of Virginia around the 1800's. Around 1833 he was purchased from his original owner, Peter Blow, by John Emerson, an officer in the United States Army. Dr. Emerson took Dred Scott to the free state of Illinois to live, and under it's constitution, he was eligible to be free. In around 1836, Dred Scott and his owner moved to Wisconsin territory, a territory that was free under the Missouri compromise. It was in Wisconsin that Dred Scott met and married Harriet Robinson. John Emerson was transferred in 1837 to Ft. Jessup, Louisiana, were he met and married Irene Sandford. Dred Scott and his wife followed Dr. Emerson and his wife from duty station to duty station; they ended up in St. Louis Mo. In May 1840 Dr. Emerson was ordered to war in Florida. Dred Scott remained in St. Louis with his family and Mrs. Emerson. Dr. Emerson returned home after the war, and relocated to Iowa. This time he left the Scotts behind and rented them out. This would be the last time Scott would see Dr. Emerson. Dr. Emerson passed away in 1843, leaving the Scott family to his wife, Irene. In 1846 Dred Scott attempted to buy his freedom from Mrs. Emerson, who refused his offer. With the help and encouragement of John Anderson, their minister, Dred Scott decided to sue.

Dred Scott lost his first case in a lower St. Louis court because he could not prove that he was owned by the Emerson family at all. A second trial took place in January 1850, Dred Scott and his family were declared "Free." Unhappy with the decision, Mrs. Emerson appealed, and in 1852 the Missouri Supreme court reversed the decision. New attorneys were needed because his first attorney had passed away. His new team consisted of attorneys that "hated" slavery. Mrs. Emerson decided to turn her assets (the Scott family included) over to her brother John F. Sandford. Because Mr. Sandford resided in New York, there was "diversity" of residence, and the case was taken to federal courts. Mr. Scott lost this suit as well, and this time appealed to the U.S Supreme Court. The U.S. Supreme court ruled that Mr. Scott was a black man and therefore had no rights; this included the right to sue.

During the trial period, Mr. Scott and his family were in the custody of the St. Louis county sheriff department. The Scotts were rented out and the money earned was held in escrow for the winner in the case. Mr. Scott was financially backed by the family of his first owner, and in fact Charles E Labeaume, the brother in law of Peter Blow, had been renting the family and helped Mr. Scott sue for his freedom in the Federal Court.

Dred Scott also sued Mr. Sandford for battery and wrongful imprisonment. Mr. Sandford did not deny Mr. Scotts claim, he agreed that he had "gently laid his hands upon" Scott and his family, but that he could do so because they were legally his property. Sanford won this case because Mr. Scott's status as a slave had already been decided by Missouri Supreme Court. There was also the question that when Mr. Scott did reside in the free states, why didn't he claim his freedom then? In the past Missouri courts supported the doctrine of "once free, always free," however Dred Scott could not read or write.

Money ran low for the Blow family and they were no longer able to support Mr. Scott. An attorney, Montgomery Blair and George T. Curtis, took the case free of charge. Mr. Scott appealed to the Supreme Court in 1854, and went to

...