The Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1837-1867, 1857-03-21
Gle Californian.
ST. JOHNsBURY, MARCH 81, 1857
SPECTAL NOTICES.

SPECIAL NoTICE5.
V.B. PALMER is authorized to receive Advel
tsements and Subscriptions at his Offices in Boston
Ncw-York, ana Philadelphia.
S. u. PETTENGILL & co. are authorized to d
the same in Boston and New-YOrk.
Job Printing.
We are now prepared to execute nearly all kind
MKNrAL,-in the VERY EKsr STYLE and at LoN
RATES. Merchants and others who desire BILL
HEADS or CIRCULARS ofany kind, printed in a nea
style, may rely upon entire satisfaction.
Orders sent us will be promptly attended to.
RAND, STONE & CO.
Correspondence.
We sohc,t VOLUNTARY CoxMUNIcATIoNsf from {
parts of tke country upon matters of interest. Item
Of NEWS, in particular miH be fully rsceired.
Decision Of the Supreme Court in
the bred Scott Case.
In our last weeks issue We gave, in brief
the main points decided BY the United State.
Supreme Court in the bred Scott Case. Fol
the information of some Of our readers, who
may not be familiar with the case which ha:
elected the opinion of the highest judicial au
thori.y Of our Government, upon question.
so deeply concerning the peace and perpetu
ity Of the Union, we su'Join statement
of the facts Ct the case, as presented by the
Chief Justice.
The following facts appear on the record
SIN the year 1894 the plaintiff was negro
slave belonging to DR.. Emer.on. who was a
surgeon in the army of the United States
In that year (ls34) said DIR. Emerson took
the plaintiff from the State Of Missouri to the
military post at Rock lslsnl, in the State of
Illinois. and held him there as slave until
the month of April, 1886. At the time last
mentioned, said DR.. Emerson removed the
plaintiff from said military post at Rock lslant
to the military post at Fort Smelling. situated
on the west bank of the Mississippi river. ir
the territory known as Upper Louisiana, &C
qnired by tho United States from France
ard situated north of the latitude Of &c 81
north, and north Ct the State OF Missouri
Said DR.. Emerson held the plaintiff in SLAYER.
a. said Fort Smelling until tho wear 1888
In the year 1885. Harriet, (who is nance
in the second count of the plaintiffs declara
ton was the slave of Maj. Talaterro,w who be
longe1 to the army Of The United States. lr
the year Qs35.) said Major Talafyrro took
said Harriet to said Fort Smelling, military
post situated as heretofore stated, and kept
her there as slave until the year 1886. an
then cold and delivered her as u slave at For,
Smelling unto sail Dr.. Emerson. heretofore
named: and said DR.. Emerson held said liar
riet in slavery a: said Fort Smelling until the
year 1898.
"In the year 1886. the plaintiff and said
Harriet, at said Fort Smelling. with the con-
sent of said DIR. Emerson, Who then claimed
to be their mas'er and owner, intermarried
and took each other for husband and wife
Eliza and Lizzie. named in the third rouni
of the plaintiffs declaration. are the fruit of
that marriage. Eliza is about fourteen vears
Old. and va, born hoord tho S.camshi p
Gipsey, north of the north line of the State
OF Missouri. and upon the Mississippi river
LIZZIE is about seven wears old, and was born
in the State Of Missouri. at the military posi-
called Jefferson Barracks.
In the year 1888, said DR.. Emerson remov
ed the plaintiff and said Harriet, and their
said daughter Eliza, from said Fort Smelling
to the State of Missouri, where they have
ever since resided
"Before the commencement of this suit
said DR.. Emerson sold and convened tn.
plaintiff, the said Harriet, Eliza and Lizzie
TO the defendant as slave:, and the detendan
claimed to hold each of them as slaves.
"At the times mentioned in the plaintiff
declaration, the defendant. claiming to b'
owner as Aforesaid. laid his hand upon saic
plaintiff, Harriet. Eliza and Lizzie, and i'm
prisoned them; doing in this respect, how
ever, no more than he might lawfully do il
they were of right his slaves at such times"
Upon these facts the plaintiff Scott suee
for liberty for himself and family. assumin;
that the removal from Missouri and residence
in illinois and Territories where Slavery ha,
been prohibited by law, had made them free
The first question discussed and decided b,
the Court, respects its own jurisdiction in thu
case. Was the plaintiff citizen of thu
United States, or a citizen of one of til,
States, so as to enable him to sue, agreeabl,
to the limitations of the Constitution, in tn,
Supreme Court of the United States /,
regard to the first part Of the question, it il
argued and affirmed that a negro, whose an
cestors were imported and sold as slaves
cannot become a member of the Poitica
Community formed and brought into exis
tence by the Constitution of the United
States, and, Is such, become entitled to tn,
rights and immunities of citizen, and con
sequently entitled to sue in the Courts of tn,
United States. "From the best considera
tion," says the Chief Justice, "we conclude
that the African race, who came to this coun
try, whether free or slave, were not intended
to be included in the Constitution, for the en-
joyment of any personal right. and benefits.
AS to the citizenship of the plaintiff in one
OF the States it is decided that the remova
and residence in Illinois and Wisconsin did
not make him freeman. and consequently
on his return to Missouri he was still slave
and not citizen. In arriving at this latte,
conclusion the Court, of necessity, first de.
cided, that the Ordinance of 1887 had No
force subsequent to the adoption of the Con.
stitution, and further, that the provisions of
the Missouri Compromise, excluding slavery
from Territory acquired and owned by the
United States were unconstitutional and of
no effect. In accordance with these decis.