The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1857-04-14
From The Missouri Republican.
DRED SCOTT CASE.

by the Supreme Court of the United States created quite
stir throughout the North generally which it has
not abated in the slightest degree and incurred the soyer
egn dispeasure Of nuberless abolition editors who have
not ceased to pour out their blngsgate upon the
y of the justices who concnrred in the decision OF that
court They have not only been accused Of want Of le-
gal knowledge and Judicial propriety and independence
but OF common honesty and decenoy while Justices Me-
Lean and Curtis who concurred in the dissenting opn
iona have been held up models OF judicial excellence
and their opinions have, with all the pomp and extrava
CANT flourish Of newspaper audaton, been pronounced
such masterpieces of logic and legal learning shonld
enanate from of the most important and enlightened
tribunals in tie world.
The opinion Of the majority Of the court has never been
published TO my knowledge therefore, what may say is
without influence from that quarter The opinions OF
Justices Mclean and Curtis have been published in fall
and apparently very ndustriousy circulated With those
profess TO be somewhat acquainted.
The facts involved in the controversy are very few and
undsputed and although in ignorance as TO the
manner in which they disposed of by the majority OF
the court may venture to state and discuss the as may
appear proper in legal view. 1t is not my purpose to
appear the champion of the Supreme Court for thai
would in all probability, be regarded as unacceptable
gratuty on the part Of the court and make me liable to
the charge Of vanity under circumstances difficult repo
it, And let be understood that do not intend to dis
the question Of slavery in political moral phi
anthropic view but to treat il in this legal in
stituton and to discuss the questions of law concerning
it which arise upon the facts Of the
1t therefore necessarily follows that this is TO be
ainned, all other questions of law are that is by
showing what legislatures courts judges and elementary
legal writers have said and done touching the subject in
voyed in the inquiry, and by making correct deductions
therefrom.
The facts in the are that bred Scott negro, be-
the slave Of Dr. Emerson under the lave of Missouri
while he stationed Mt Jefferson barracks in that State
surgeon in the United States army. Scott remained
time the slave Of Emerson at the barracks and
taken thence by him his slave to the military post
Rock Island, in the free State of Illinois After having
been held in slavery years at that post by Emer
SON. he thence taken by him his slave to Fort Smell
ling in the Territory of Minnesota ard after remaining in
that capacity ut the fort year two Scott brought
by Emerson back into the State of Missouri Shortly after
their return Emerson departed this life and Mr. j. f. A.
Sanford qualified his executor, and hired Scott in
Missouri and subsequently, removed to and took up his
dcnce in the State of New York After Sanfords removal
Scott instituted suit against him in St Lonis county,
Missouri in the circuit court Of the United States under
the judiciary act Of 1885, in the form of action COM
law for trespass III ct 5ais end false imprisonment
shall endeayor 10 maintain two propositions, which
will, | conceive determine the right to recover in this
suit.
lst That free negro is not citizen within the mean
ing Of the I'd section Of the 4h article of the constitution
of the United States and
into free State and held there in slavery, and afterwards
returned back into slave State his former condition Of
slavery to all nens and purposes, reattaches to him.
will be readily perceived that either of these propo-
stons be established Automatically Scott had right to
recover in this suit
The former proposition goes only to the jurisdiction
the circuit court because If he be not citizen he is incom-
peen to sue in that court under the Judiciary act And
the second points to the question of jurisdiction
cause free negro is not citizen it will not be contend
ed that slave negro be- and il also defeats Scotts
right to recover upon the facts in the case.
In support of the proposition that Scott is not citizen
refer first to the OF the State of Connecticut u.s. Pr-
dencc Candel decided in 1885, and reported in 10 Con-
necticut Reports, p. $40
insert the preamble and first section of the statute upon
which the Of Crande based that 1t may be clearly
how the legislature and judiciary treat the ect
late as 1888; 35 a8
Whereas attempts have been made to establish literary
institutions in this State for the education Of colorcd per-
sons belonging TO other States and countries which would
tend to the great increase OF the cooed population of the
State, and thereby TO the injury ofc people therefore,
BE i eaacied sc. SIC That person shall set up
establish in this State any school, academy literary
suan for the instruction education OF coored persons
who not inhabitants of this State, instruct or
teach in any school, academy or other literary institu-
on in this State or haror or board for the purpose Of
attending being taught instructed in any school,
academy any literary institution any coloed person
who is not nhabitant of any town in the State with
the consent in writing first had and obtained OF the
majority of the civil authorities and also of the sesctmen
Of the town in which such school, academy literary in
ttnon is situated and each and every person who shall
knowingly do any net forbidden aforesaid or shall be
aiding assisting therein shall for the first offence forfeit
and pay to the treasurer Of this State fine of hun
dred dollars and for the second offence two hundred dol
lars, and SO doubling for every additional offence.
Crandell was prosecuted for violation of this sec
on and defended upon the ground that the statute
unconstitutional and void because it in conflict with
the second section OF article four of the constitution of the
United States which is in these words Tho citizens Of
each Stats shall be entitled 10 all the privileges and immu-
mites of citizens in the several Sates II is therefore cear
the defence set up by Crandel insufficient unless free
blacks are citizens within the meaning Of the above
top seavf
Chief Justice Daggett in his opinon says The persons
described in the act Of assembly citizens within the
United States Let begin by asking this plain question:
Are slaves citizens AT The time Of the adoption OF the
constitution Of the United States every State was slave
State. We all know that slavery Ia recog-
nised by that constitution and it is the duty OF this
court to take that constitution it is, for have
support it Although the term slavery is not
written out on the constitution yet mistake
the object of section Of article 4, and of section
Of article lst think Chancellor Kent whose authority
1t gives me pleasure to quote determines this question by
implication. Had this authority considered free blacks c
ens he had ample opportunity TO say But what he
has said excludes that idea In most of the United States
there distinction in respect the political privileges
between free whites and free colocd persons of African
blood In part of the country do the latter, in point
OF fact participate equally with the whites in the sxer-
else OF civil and political rights The African
senallya degraded CASTE of inferior rank and condition
in society Marriages forbidden between them and the
whites in of the States, and when not absolutely
contrary to law they revolving and regarded
fence against public decorum BY the revised statutes Of
illinois, of 1922 marriages between whites and negroes or
liable to be whipped fined and Imprisoned BY an old
satute Of Massachusetts, Of 1906 such marriages de-
cared void, and so STILL similar statutory proys-
ion exists in Virginia and North Carolina. Such