The Hillsdale standard. [volume] (Hillsdale, Mich.) 1851-1909, 1857-03-17
Decision in the Dred Scott Case -savery DE.
clared to be Constitutional and National.

WASHINGTON, March @.
The opinion of the Supreme Court in the
Dred Scott case was delivered by Chief JUS
tice Taney. II was a full and elaborate state
ment Of the views of the Court. They have
decided the following all-important points
1st. That negroes, whether slaves or free,
that is, men of the African race, are not cit
liens of the United States by the Constitu.
ton.
I'd. That the ordinance of 1887 had no in
dependent Constitutional force or legal effect
subsequent to the adoption of the Constitu-
tuition, and could not operate of itself to free
dom or citizenship within the Northwest Ter
ritory on negroes not citizens by the Constitu-
ton.
3d. That the provision of the act of 1920,
commonly called the Missouri Compromise, in
so far as it undertook TO exclude negro slavo-
ry from and communicate freedom and citi-
zenship to negroes in the Northern part of
the couatry-the Louisiana cession-was
legislative act exceeding the powers Of Con-
gress, and void and of no legal effect to that
end.
In deciding the main points the Superior
Court determined the following incidental
points
lst. The expression "territory and other
property of tho Union," in the Constitution,
applies in terms only to such territory as the
Union possessed at the time of the adoption
of the Constitution.
I'd. The rights Of citizens of the United
States emigrating 10 any federal territory,
and the power of the Federal Government
there, depends on the general provisions of
the Constitution, which defines in this, as
all other respects, the powers of Congress.
Sd. AS Congress does not possess power it.
self to make an enacment relative to the per-
sons and property of citizens of the United
States in federal territory other than such as
tutionally delegate any such powers to Ter
ritoral Government organized by it under tho
Constitution.
4th. The legal condition of a slave in the
State of Missouri is not affected by Temporal
ry sojourn of auch slave in any other State,
but on his return his condition still depends
on the laws of Missouri. AS the plaintiff
was not citizen of Missouri, and therefore
could not sue in the courts of the United
States, the suit must be dismissed for want Of
jurisdiction.
The delivery of this opinion occupied about
three hours, and it was listened to with pro-
found attention by a crowded court ROOM
Among the audience was many gentlemen of
eminent legal ability and due proportion of
ladies' Justice Nelson stated the merits Of
the case, the question being whether or no.
the removal of Scott from Missouri with his
master to Illinois with view of temporary
residence, worked his emancipation. He
maintained that the question depended Who'll
ly on the law Of Missouri, and for that rea-
son the judgment Of the court below should
he affirmed.
Justice Catron believed the Supreme Court
iuridiction to decide the merits of tho case.
He argued that Congress could not do direct
" what it could not do indirectly. If it
could exclude one species of property it could
another. With regard to the Territories ce-
dcd, Congress could govern them only with
the restriction Of the States. The Missouri
Compromise of 1920 violated the leading
features of the Constitution. 1t was there
fore void He concurred with his brother
Judge, that Scott is slave and was SO when
the suit was brought.
Several of the other Judges are to deliver
their views tomorrow.