Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

HISTORY, AND SOCIAL AND POLITICAL SCIENCE.

Handbook of Dates. By Henry Clinton BROWN. 12 mo. Cloth. viii+182 pp. Price.....

[ocr errors]

Arranged alphabetically and chronologically, comprising all the important events from the earliest ages to within the present decade.

The Honors of the Empire State in the War of the Rebellion.
By THOS. S. TOWNSEND. Large 12 mo. Cloth. 416 pp. Price...2'50
A history of the military operations of the Empire State during the Civil War.
Who? When? And What? Six Centuries of Men and Events.
In Chart form. Price, in Duck case, 50 cents; Leather case........
Political Economy for American Youth. By J. HARRIS PATton.
12 mo. Cloth. viii+298 pp. Price........

75

.....I OO

It advocates the adoption and maintenance of an economic system suited to American conditions, while at the same time recognizing at their full value commercial and industrial relations with foreign nations. The principles advanced are re-enforced by citations from our national history.

The Eight Hours Day.

By SIDNEY WEBB and HAROld Cox.
Price.......

.................

12 mo. viii+280 pp. Paper covers.
The question is discussed in its historical, economic, and social aspects, and
contains a bibliography for further research,

50

Civics for Young Americans. By WM. M. GIFFIN. Large 12 mo. 132 pp. With an illustration. Cloth. Price....

The author shows in a strikingly novel and interesting way, and in language intelligible to a ten-year-old boy, the necessity of government, the different forms of government, and the advantages of our government over all others.

Civil Government. By R. E. Clement. 12 mo. Cloth. xiv+ 232 pp. Price......

A brief and lucid treatise on the Federal Constitution, and the Colonial Revolutionary and Confederate Governments which preceded it.

50

84

English Political Orations from Wentworth to Macaulay. Edited, with Introduction, by WILLIAM Clarke. 12 mo. xvi+312 pp. Cloth, uncut, price, 40 cents; red roan, $1.25; half morc., g. t..I 50 Great speeches on great themes by famous English statesmen. The selection covers a period from 1576 to 1831.

For sale by all booksellers, or sent by mail, postpaid, on receipt of the price. A. LOVELL & CO., PUBLISHERS,

521 Wabash Ave., Chicago.

3 East 14th Street, New York.

PUBLICLIBRARY
P 4208

ASTOR, LENOX AND
TADEN FOUNDATIONS.
1897.

American History Leaflets.

COLONIAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL.

No. 23.-SEPTEMBER, 1895.

EXTRACTS FROM

THE DRED SCOTT DECISION, 1857.

Of all the decisions ever rendered by the Supreme Court of the United States none has been so much discussed by others than constitutional lawyers. It was rendered at a time of great public excitement, was intended to settle the long-standing controversy over the question of territorial slavery, and is marked as one of the few decisions of the Court in which each of the judges delivered a separate opinion. On the other hand, the case presented before the Court was held by two of the justices and many jurists not to be strictly within its jurisdiction at all; the decree was openly scouted by many public men, including Abraham Lincoln; and six years after the decision was rendered Congress by an act prohibiting slavery in the territories practically nullified and defied it.

The facts of the case are stated in some of the quotations below. Dred Scott, a slave held in Missouri, claimed his freedom on the ground that his master had carried him into Illinois, a free state, and Louisiana territory, covered by the Missouri Compromise act of 1820 He was backed up by the Blairs of St. Louis, who kept the case alive, employed counsel, and carried up appeals. Alexander Sandford of New York as administrator became the alleged owner of Scott, and therefore the defendant. Four different suits were tried. 1. In the St. Louis State Circuit Court: judgment for Dred Scott (1847). 2. Missouri Supreme Court on writ of error: judgment against Scott (1848.) 3. United States Circuit Court: judgment that a negro might sue as a citizen; but against Scott in his claim to freedom (1854). 4. United States Supreme Cou

writ of error: judgment that a negro could not sue as citizen, and that Scott was a slave (1857.) Scott was afterward set free with the consent of his legal owner.

Judge Nelson's opinion was originally prepared as the opinion of the Supreme Court. Afterward a new set of opinions was drawn up, no two judges exactly coinciding in their judgment. The opinion read by Taney as that of the Court, is substantially individual. To ascertain what the judgment of the Court really was, it is necessary to compare the nine opinions and tabulate the results.

Contemporary discussions of the decision are: Thomas H. Benton, Historical and Legal Examination of the Dred Scott Case; S. A. Foot, Examination of the Case of Dred Scott; Gray and Lowell, Legal Review of the Case of Dred Scott; J. C. Hurd, Law of Freedom and Bondage, 1. § $489-539. The text of the decision is in 19 Howard, 399.

The best general accounts are H. Von Holst, Constitutional History of the United States VI. ch. i.; J. F. Rhodes, History of the United States, II. 252-275; Samuel Tyler, Memoirs of R. B. Taney, 359-438.

OPINION OF THE COURT.

[399] Mr. Chief Justice Taney delivered the opinion of the Court.

This case has been twice argued. After the argument at the last term, differences of opinion were found to exist among the members of the Court; and as the questions in controversy are of the highest importance, and the Court was at that time much pressed by the ordinary business of the term, it was deemed advisable to continue the case, and direct a re-argument on some of the points, in order that we might have an opportunity of giving to the whole subject a more deliberate [400] consideration. It has accordingly been again argued by counsel, and considered by the Court; and I now proceed to deliver its opinion.

There are two leading questions presented by the record: 1. Had the Circuit Court of the United States jurisdiction to hear and determine the case between these parties? And 2. If it had jurisdiction, is the judgment it has given erroneous or not?

[ocr errors]

The plaintiff in error, who was also the plaintiff in the Court below, was, with his wife and children, held as slaves he defendant, in the State of Missouri; and he brought, action in the Circuit Court of the JInited

district, to assert the title of himself and his family to freedom.

The declaration is in the form usually adopted in that State to try questions of this description, and contains the averment necessary to give the Court jurisdiction; that he and the defendant are citizens of different States; that is, that he is a citizen of Missouri, and the defendant a citizen of New York.

The defendant pleaded in abatement to the jurisdiction of the Court, that the plaintiff was not a citizen of the State of Missouri, as alleged in his declaration, being a negro of African descent, whose ancestors were of pure African blood, and who were brought into this country and sold as slaves.

And

To this plea the plaintiff demurred, and the defendant joined in demurrer. The Court overruled the plea, and gave judgment that the defendant should answer over. he therefore put in sundry pleas in bar, upon which issues were joined; and at the trial the verdict and judgment were in his favor. Whereupon the plaintiff brought this writ of error.

Before we speak of the pleas in bar, it will be proper to dispose of the questions which have arisen on the plea in abatement.

That plea denies the right of the plaintiff to sue in a court of the United States, for the reasons therein stated.

If the question raised by it is legally before us, and the Court should be of opinion that the facts stated in it disqualify the plaintiff from becoming a citizen, in the sense in which that word is used in the Constitution of the United States, then the judgment of the Circuit Court is erroneous, and must be reversed.

It is suggested, however, that this plea is not before us; and that as the judgment in the Court below on this plea was in favor of the plaintiff, he does not seek to reverse it, or bring it before the Court for revision by his writ of error; and also that the defendant waived this defence by pleading over, and thereby admitted the jurisdiction of the Court.

[401] But, in making this objection, we think the peculiar and limited jurisdiction of courts of the United States has not been adverted to. This peculiar and limited jurisdiction has made it necessary, in these courts, to adopt different rules and principles of pleading, so far as jurisdiction

[merged small][ocr errors]
« AnteriorContinuar »