What happened to Dred Scott? A Pivotal Figure in American History

The 1857 Dred Scott decision was a significant decision made by the U.S. Supreme Court and had profound and far-reaching consequences on American history.

Born into slavery, Dred Scott’s quest for freedom through the legal system sparked a divisive national debate over issues such as citizenship rights, the legitimacy of slavery in new territories, and the deeply entrenched North-South divide.

Who was Dred Scott?

Due to his crucial part in a major court battle, Dred Scott—a significant person in American history—became well-known.

In Southampton County, Virginia, Dred Scott was born into slavery in 1799. His life would ultimately change when he came under the ownership of army surgeon Dr. John Emerson.

The relevance of Dred Scott’s account comes from his friendship with Dr. Emerson, who accompanied him on trips to several places, including free regions like the Wisconsin Territory and Illinois, where slavery was illegal.

By marrying Harriet Robinson around this period, Dred Scott also established a close relationship as she joined the Emerson family.

However, Dred Scott’s life took a significant turn after Dr. Emerson passed away in 1843. After the death of his master, Dred Scott and his wife, Harriet, started a legal battle to gain their independence.

Their claim was predicated on the contention that being in a free territory ought to have legally freed them from the chains of slavery.

The landmark Dred Scott ruling by the US Supreme Court was the result of Dred Scott’s fight for freedom through the legal system.

Beyond the parameters of his battle, this historic decision had far-reaching and long-lasting effects on the United States.

The ruling touched on citizenship rights, the legitimacy of concessions like the Missouri Compromise, and the larger question of slavery in the United States in addition to Scott’s destiny.

What happened to Dred Scott?

Dred Scott passed away from tuberculosis, while his wife Harriet lived long enough to witness the end of slavery in the United States with the ratification of the Thirteenth Amendment in 1865.

An important individual in American history, Dred Scott, fought for freedom through a long judicial struggle. He was born into slavery and later came to belong to Missourian John Emerson.

What happened to Dred Scott
Dred Scott

He traveled through free states and territories, such as Illinois and the Wisconsin Territory, where he married Harriet Robinson, before arriving in a slave state. These moves throughout the country were very important to his legal battle.

Dred Scott and his wife Harriet filed proceedings in the Missouri state court in 1846, claiming that they had been freed from slavery since they lived in free areas, with the help of antislavery attorneys.

The issue eventually made its way to the US Supreme Court in 1857 following a string of court rulings and reversals.

What role did the Dred Scott ruling have in the American Civil War?

The American Civil War eventually broke out as a result of the Dred Scott ruling, which further exacerbated the already rising tensions between the North and South over the contentious subject of slavery.

The country was rocked by the Supreme Court of the United States’ 1857 ruling. The decision that Dred Scott, a slave who had lived in free states and territories, was not entitled to his freedom was one of its main features.

In addition, the court ruled that the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional and that African Americans could never be citizens of the United States.

Previously, the Missouri Compromise had established a precarious equilibrium by stating that those areas north of latitude 36°30′ and west of Missouri would be free, while those south of the line might continue to allow slavery.

The decision sparked fury and indignation in the North. It was viewed as a flagrant instance of pro-slavery views predominating in the courts and as a direct danger to the ideals of freedom and equality.

Growing anti-slavery fervor was stoked by the Supreme Court’s perceived overreach and the North’s rejection of the ruling.

On the other hand, the ruling was hailed as a success for the institution of slavery in the South. For many Southerners, it was confirmation of the view held by leaders such as John C. Calhoun that the federal government was obligated under the Constitution to defend slavery.

The ruling strengthened the argument that slavery was guaranteed by the constitution, which increased Southern hostility to any perceived challenges to their “peculiar institution.”

About the Author

Leave a Comment