The Brattleboro reformer. (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1907-1912, 1907-07-19

Scott was only an illterate slave, his
name deriving its importance solely from
its association with a great constitutional
question He was born a slave, and was
taken, when about % years old, by his
master from Missouri to what was then
Wisconsin territory. There he married
and two children were born to him. On
his return to Missouri he sued for his
freedom and that of his family. on the
ground that it had been acquired by
residence in a free state. He won his
case. but his master appealed it, and the
Missouri supreme court decided against
Scott On being sold to a citizen OF New
York, John +. A. Sandiord, he again APP
pealed to the courts for freedom, was
again adJudged a slave, and finally car
RED the case to the United States SUI
preme court, which in 1856 affirmed the
Judgment of the lower tribunal
| The trial attracted the attention of the
whole country, and eminent lawyers took
part in it without asking compensation.
appeared for Scott, while opposed to him
were Reverdy johnson and Henry :.
Geyer Chief Justice Taney's opinion,
read two days after Buchanans inaugu-
ration. was received by the nation with
intense interest. In affirming the decis-
ion of the lower court, it declared that
the act of congress prohibiting slavery
north of latitude SO degrees 30 minutes
was unconstitutional and void. Thomas
| H. Benton said that this decision made
slavery the organic law of the land, while
! freedom was the exception. Soon after
the decision was rendered the ownership
of Scott and his family passed by inheri-
lance to the family of Calvin G. Chaffee,
member of congress from Massachu
sets, by whose orders they were legally
emancipated in st. Louis on May r.
1857. A representative of Leslie's Week
ly visited them soon after that date and
obtained photographs. 1t was said that
Scott had refused an offer of large sum
of money to travel through the north
and show himself to abolitionists, ana
that by this means he might have Sc
cured his freedom before he was enamel
pated.
More excitement than that occasioned
by the bred Scott decision was caused i'll
New York by the conflict between the
metropolitan" and the municipal po-
lice forces of that city in June, 1857.
During the winter of 1867 bill was
passed by the state Legislature depriying
Mayor Fernando Wood of all control OF
Vic Dblltt dboilsiiliS bHt
force. The mayor refused to recognize
the change, and the metropolitan force
was organized independently of him and
his advisers, among whom was the IA
nous lawyer, Charles O'Conor. For sew
eral weeks the city was under the protec-
ton of two sets of police guardians, the
''municipals" owning allegiance to the
mayor, the ''metropolitans' to the metro
poltan police commissioners. June IL,
the mayor having refused to recognize
new street commissioner, appointed by
the governor to succeed Joseph S. Taylor,
who had died in Office, an attempt was
made to arrest him, a body of so met
ropolitans" being sent to the city hall.
Armed with long clubs, they attempted
to enter the building, which Chief Matsell
had strongly garrisoned with munich
pals A fierce fight ensued, in which
the ''metropolitans" were routed, some
of them receiving serious wounds from
the clubs of their opponents. The record
er then took hand, issuing two war
rants for Wood, one charging him with
resisting the process of the courts and
the other with melting a riot. The mayor
finally submitted to arrest at the hands
of the sheriff, gave bail, and the 18th regi-
ment which had been held in readiness
for putting down the riot if it should be
called upon, was allowed to leave the
city for the Bunker Hill celebration in
Boston. The constitutionality of the act