0
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What was the status of Dred Scott while he was living in the Wisconsin Territories?
Dred Scott v. Sanford, 60 US 393 (1857)There is some dispute as to whether Dred Scott lived with Dr. Emerson in the Wisconsin Territories or Upper Louisiana Territory (the Supreme Court documentation refers to the Upper Louisiana Territory, but most historical accounts refer to the Wisconsin Territories); however, his status in either area would have been that of a free man.In the Wisconsin Territories, slavery was prohibited by the Northwest Ordinance (aka "An Ordinance for the Government of the Territory of the United States, North-West of the River Ohio," affirmed by Congress in 1789); in Upper Louisiana Territory, he would have been free by virtue of living north of the 36th parallel, per the Missouri Compromise of 1820.Dred Scott would also have been free when stationed with Dr. Emerson at Rock Island, Illinois, because of Illinois' status as a "free state."The accepted doctrine prior to the Supreme Court ruling in Scott v. Sanford, (1857), was "once free, always free."
Is Dred Scott single?
No, Dred Scott is not single.
Why did Dred Scott claim that he became a freeman by entering the Louisiana Territory?
Because the Louisiana Territory wasn't divided into free or slave states yet.
Who won dred Scott vs sandford?
Dred Scott lost
Was dred Scott union or confederate?
Dred Scott was in the Union.
What did Dred Scott base his claim of freedom on?
Dred Scot's master had taken him to a free territory.
What was the status of Dred Scott while he was living in the Wisconsin Territories?
Dred Scott v. Sanford, 60 US 393 (1857)There is some dispute as to whether Dred Scott lived with Dr. Emerson in the Wisconsin Territories or Upper Louisiana Territory (the Supreme Court documentation refers to the Upper Louisiana Territory, but most historical accounts refer to the Wisconsin Territories); however, his status in either area would have been that of a free man.In the Wisconsin Territories, slavery was prohibited by the Northwest Ordinance (aka "An Ordinance for the Government of the Territory of the United States, North-West of the River Ohio," affirmed by Congress in 1789); in Upper Louisiana Territory, he would have been free by virtue of living north of the 36th parallel, per the Missouri Compromise of 1820.Dred Scott would also have been free when stationed with Dr. Emerson at Rock Island, Illinois, because of Illinois' status as a "free state."The accepted doctrine prior to the Supreme Court ruling in Scott v. Sanford, (1857), was "once free, always free."
Who said that he should be free because he lived in a free territory?
Dred Scott.
What was the judges decision in the Dred Scott Case?
it made slavery and the western territory
Who is a slave who sued for his freedom after being taken into free territory by owner?
Dred Scott, a slave, sued for his freedom after being taken by his owner to free territories. The landmark Supreme Court case of Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) ruled that even though Scott was in a free territory, he was not entitled to freedom because he was property under the law.
Who is the slave that sued after being takeninto free territory by owner?
the owner didnt take him there his owner died and he fled. his name is Dred Scott and he lost the dred Scott case.
Slave who sued for his freedom after being taken into free territory by owner?
Dred Scott
What slave who was living in a free territory for 4 years sue for his freedom?
dred scott
What did Dred Scott claim John Sanford did to him and his family?
First of all, John Sandford was not the original defendant in the case. The original defendant was Irene Emerson, Dred Scott's owner. John Sandford was Irene Emerson's brother, and acted on her behalf. As such, Dred Scott never claimed that John Sandford did anything to his family. Now as far as Irene Emerson goes, Dred Scott claimed that she was harming him and his family by not allowing them to be free, in violation of the Missouri Compromise. Scott's claim was that since he had lived in free states (namely, Illinois and Wisconsin Territory) where the Missouri Compromise outlawed slavery, that should have made him free.
How was dred Scott discriminated?
because they said "slaves are property" and said that the Missouri compromise was unconstitutional and they wanted to keep slaves out of western territory and any slaves found free would be back in captivity and even though Dred Scott was free for 19 years they still made him to be a slave because of the Dred Scott vs. Sanford .That is how Dred Scott was discriminated.
What years did the Dred Scott decision take place prior to the Civil War?
The Dred Scott decision or Dred Scott v. Sandford, took place in 1857. His case was based on the fact that he and his wife Harriet Scott were slaves, but had lived in states and territories where slavery was illegal, including Illinois and Minnesota (which was then part of the Wisconsin Territory). Dred Scott lost the case when The United States Supreme Court ruled seven to two, on the grounds that he, nor any person of African ancestry, could claim citizenship in the United States, and that therefore Scott could not bring suit in federal court under diversity of citizenship rules.
Is Dred Scott single?
No, Dred Scott is not single.
