capitan_refugio #384 8/31/2004 to nc purported three quotes to be about the SCOTUS case of Scott v. Sandford which were actually about the Missouri case of Scott v. Emerson.
[capitan kerry_fugio #1086] (2) All part of the Dred Scott record.
One is a Federal case against Sandford.
The other is a Missouri case against Emerson.
It is two different cases. One was held under Missouri state law. The other was under Federal law.
They are not interchangeable. And you know it.
Scott v Sandford did not appear out of thin air, without a history. Although Negro citizenship and the restriction on slavery in the territories in the Missouri Compromise were not part of Emerson, other issues did. Fehrenbacher notes that Scott's attorney, Montgomery Blair, "drew heavily from Judge Gamble's dissenting opinion in Scott v Emerson." Fehrenbacher also notes that the "defence counsel reiterated the arguments previously used in Sanford's behalf."
My comment that these cases were "all part of the Dred Scott record" is quite true.