The Washington union., 1857-06-02
THE DRIED scorr pEoIsIoN.
Detroit Free Press pointcdly remarks ;

The Detroit Free Press polntedly remarks
% Many preacher has Illuminated sermons against the
bred Scott decision and yet not of them had read
the opinion of the Supreme Court knew precisely
what gtouhd the decision covered Its publication shows
that ii does not quite the ground the preche bad
supposed Ii enunciates quite different doctrine thar
that charged upon IT, as we showed yesterday But what
of this VIII the preachers correct the they
have spread concerning it Not they Probably most
of them will read the opinion and nine out OF
ten will persist in the Misrepresentation they have In
dulged."
In this cuhnexioni we make room for the following
instructive revelation, which we find iii late mum:
Der Of the Providence Post
g Is IT ARE OLD TRUErESNY Soon after
the Dred Scott trial brought to conclusion, it
stated by southern editor that Scott the property
OF the Hon. Mr.. Chafiee, blackTepublican member OF
Congress from Massachusetts, and that Chaee and not
Sandord was The real defendant IN the case. Some of
Mr.. Chaffees friends Immediately denied this but the
gentleman himself finally forced into the field and
had to admit IN substance that Scott had come INTO his
hands the property of his wife The public given
to understand however that Mr. Chaee could not eman
cipae Scott If he wanted TO- and that it not his
Chaees fault that the poor slave had to sue for his lib
erty and in vain 1t turns out at last however,
that Scott has been enancipated and that, TO
this result Mr. Chaee not being citizen OF Missouri
the law requires had to convey him to Taylor Blow who
executed the deed OF nianumssion OF course Chafee
must have been Scott or he could not have con
veyed him to Blow The following telegraph despatch,
received yesterday tells the whole story
80 ST. LOUIS, May 26-Dred Scett, with his wife and
two daughters, emancipated to-day by Taylor Blow,
esq They had all been conveyed to him by Mr. Chaee,
of Massachusetts,, for that purpose.
The following, from the st. Louis Republican of
the 9th instant, is fitting sequel to the above
The owners of bred Seott have done That for him
which the Supreme Court of the United States have dec
ded the law would not do they have made him free
man, with liberty to go where he peases, without so
much saying, by your leave This favor was accorded
to Dred yesterday in the circuit court where Mr. Taylor
Blow appeared and entered record the papers neces
sary to the freedom of bred Scott his wife Hem
rietta, and his two daughters, Eliza and Jane But
should be understood that, except for the purpose
of this act, Mr.. Blow not the owner of these
slaves if his property at all it only to
compliance with the law of Missouri which requires
that person manumittng slave should be citizen of
State. To constitute him owner the title must have
passed from DIR Chaffee his wife, and her child or chill
dren and therefore they sold these slaves to him for
nominal consideration perhaps but still they sold
and by such Dred Scott and his wife and children
have been set free The ownership in Dr. Chaffee
and his family pending the trial in courts md this
is the point which desire the public should bear in
mind whenever occasion is taken to alhde to the subject
Let Dred go: he will suffer than any one else by
the decree of emancipation for old and worn out he
is, and all his political notoriety gone he will have
hard time to make living he is forced to depend upon
the charities Of black republicans and aboonists.