Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: chajin; henkster; CougarGA7; BroJoeK; central_va; Larry Lucido; wagglebee; Colonel_Flagg; Amagi; ...
Continued from yesterday (reply #31).

1

 photo 0309-ds_zpsck3ffleu.jpg

2

 photo 0309-ds2_zps4nbus3nn.jpg

Don E. Fehrenbacher, The Dred Scott Case: Its Significance in American Law and Politics" (1978)

37 posted on 03/09/2017 4:56:56 AM PST by Homer_J_Simpson ("Every nation has the government that it deserves." - Joseph de Maistre (1753-1821))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]


To: Homer_J_Simpson

It is amazing to me that not that long ago in historic time serious people and the highest court in the United States were having these discussions about a human being. It certainly supports the argument that the institution of slavery dehumanized its proponents too.


38 posted on 03/09/2017 11:41:09 AM PST by colorado tanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

To: Homer_J_Simpson; henkster; Jim 0216
"Don E. Fehrenbacher, The Dred Scott Case..."

Seems to me, the closer we look at Dred-Scott, the more confusing it gets.
That may help explain why Lincoln himself took months to seriously comment on it -- what does it really say & mean?

I'd suggest it was the culmination of decades of pro-slavery efforts to end the interminable debate by deciding, once and for all, that slavery was constitutionally lawful anywhere, everywhere and under all conditions within the United States & territories.
How valid its specific rulings may or may not have been is irrelevant to its purpose: to end the debate by making slavery lawful, period.

As such it not only satisfied pro-slavery citizens, it also set for them a new standard of what was, or was not, tolerable in discussions: slavery was constitutional & lawful, any suggestions otherwise were not tolerable.
This meant that Republican calls for Federally enforced abolition in western territories were not constitutionally acceptable in the minds of those pro-slavery.

Consider: In 1784 Thomas Jefferson himself proposed abolition in the Northwest Territories, with no resulting threats of secession or war from slave holders.
But by 1860, the Supreme Court's Dred-Scott ruling made such ideas "unconstitutional" and the Republican Party's platform of restricting slavery in western territories became grounds, in pro-slavery minds, for drastic actions.

At the same time Dred-Scott outraged anti-slavery citizens by reversing what they had grown to see as a slow but inevitable progress towards nation-wide abolition.
It turned many Northerners away from consensus Democrats like Pennsylvanian & President James Buchanan and towards the expressly anti-slavery party -- Republicans.

43 posted on 03/10/2017 9:50:51 AM PST by BroJoeK (a little historical perspective...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson