The Dred Scott Decision: Free Or Free?

1570 Words7 Pages
The case that changed it all came in 1857 as in the North people were also angered over the Dred Scott decision as it only widened the political and social gap between the North and South and took the nation only closer to a civil war. Dred Scott was a slave that was taken to a free slave state with his master and lived on the land for a long time to be only returned to Missouri, which was a slave state but his master passed away and Dred Scott decided to sue for his freedom by the help of abolitionist lawyers. Dred Scott claimed he should be free since he had lived on free soil for many years. In 1857, Dred Scott lost due to decision by seven out of nine of Justices on the Supreme Court voted he must be a citizen, so as a non-citizen he could not sue in a federal court and must go back to being a slave. Howard on page 33 states perfectly what this decision was truly meant by stating, “As relates to these States, it is too plain for argument, that they have never been regarded as a part of the people or citizens of the State, nor supposed to possess any political rights which the dominant race might not withhold or grant at their pleasure.” This also inferred that free soil and popular…show more content…
As Lincolns main goal was to preserve the union because without the Union the slaves wouldn’t have even been given the chance to be free. Many factors lead up to the divide from the economic differences as in what’s best for the union, the political problems of who would be the future president, and when you look at these issues slavery played a part in all of these issues. Many have said slavery was the cause of the civil war and they could be right but the correct way to phrase that would be is by saying the way in which Americans preferred American life to be like in the future would be ideal, because that was the real
Open Document