Jurisdiction, Research Paper on Dred Scott v. Sandford"Written by Charles HallmarkDescribed as being poorly educated, indigent, feeble, and ill prone, Dred Scott seemed consistent with society's definition of the black slave. However, he was an articulate man who changed our society and American standards. Married to Harriet Scott with four (4) children, Dred wanted to provide his family with a sense of dignity and decency that a free man's status would warrant him. He was the cause of a change in how society viewed Negroes. In this research paper you will find out why Dred Scott v. Sandford made every black man ask themselves the question, am I free or have I been deprived of my freedom? Nonetheless, if you read on I can offer you a complete and accurate depiction of Dred Scott v. Sandford and the repercussions that it had upon our society.John and Irene Emerson were the owners of Dred Scott. However, Peter Blow was the former owner. John took Scott from Illinois (a free state) to Missouri (a slave state). Scott lived in free soil for approximately four (4) years. Dred Scott demanded his freedom because he felt that he was a resident now of Illinois. If this were accurate then Scott had to be free because it was free soil. The case later became known as the Dred Scott v. Sandford. At first the case was taken into a federal court with John Emerson as the defendant. Scott had lost the case in the state court. Shortly thereafter John Emerson died. Mrs. Emerson, now a widowed wife, left Dred Scott with John Sanford, who was a New York citizen. John Sanford was sued with the help of the Blows family in a federal court. Eventually, the case was appealed in the Supreme Court. Roger B. Taney, which you will learn later, had an integral impact on the decision. Read on to see more about one of the most vile and dismal days of all time. That day proved costly not only for Dred Scott, but the entire black population of the U...
