Preview

The Three Main Causes Of The Civil War

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
438 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
The Three Main Causes Of The Civil War
The Civil War The Civil War was one of America’s greatest memorable historic events. Many innocent soldiers were killed and it led to a world full of hatred and crime. One of America’s greatest renowned president's reputation was also destroyed during this war. There was much diversity and conflict that led up to the civil war. The three main causes of the civil war were… It was the year of 1820 when Henry Clay proposed the Missouri Compromise. Missouri had just been admitted a slave state and Maine had been admitted a free state. Clay wanted to settle disputes concerning slavery, but instead he made matters a lot worse. As he was conducting the Missouri Compromise there were disputes between the Pro-slavery citizens and the Anti-slavery citizens. After Clay realized that maybe the Missouri compromise wasn’t the best solution he decided to conduct the 1850 compromise. He wanted to settle the problem of …show more content…
Dred Scott was a Missouri slave who wanted to speak out and be recognized. He wanted to free other slaves and have freedom over the entire country. The supreme court would not let him sue. For the reason that he was not a U.S. citizen because he was a slave. He wanted to sue for his fight for freedom. The court also stated that Scott was not free since the 5th amendment states that citizens cannot be deprived of their poverty and slaves are property. Dred Scott was a well known man that only needed a little light to shine to know his worth. It was the year of 1859, when John Brown was recognized. He was an abolitionist who led a raid on the federal arsenal at Harper's Ferry, Va. Brown was known for being a leader and having the view of society as “Jesus.” He wanted to inspire a slave rebellion to uprise slavery. Southerners were angered by the northern support for Brown, leading the country to the brink of war. Even though Brown had the name “Jesus” he wasn’t all that powerful as he dreamed to

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Better Essays

    Facts: This lawsuit involves Dred Scott, an African American slave and his owner due to the passing of his previous owner Dr. Emerson, John F. A. Sanford. John F.A Sanford is the brother to the wife of Dr. Emerson. Dred Scott sued for his freedom in the Missouri Circuit Court for the City of St. Louis on April 6, 1846 . Dred Scott’s legal suit is for assault and false imprisonment: “A slave could be punished and kept as property, but a free person could not.”…

    • 1622 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    On March 6, 1857, Justice Taney stated that Dred Scott had no right to bring a law suit in Federal Court, because the Constitution only afforded that right to U.S. citizens. Since Scott was a slave, he was not a citizen. He went…

    • 213 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Dred Scott was a African American slave born in Virginia in the year 1800. In the 1830s Scott and Harriet Robinson lived in Fort Snelling in the 1830s working as free people as slavery was outlawed in the area. He lived there with an army surgeon named Emerson and was paid an independent salary. When Emerson was reassigned to the south they Scotts moved to fort Jesup in Louisiana. But soon returned to Fort snelling. In 1846 the Scotts decided to sue for their freedom because they were denied the optioned to buy it by Emerson's widow. In 1853 they filed in federal court. After Dred was freed in St. Louis circuit court in 1857, the supreme court made a decision based on the Dred Scott case stating that African Americans were not citizens and…

    • 193 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Dred Scott was born into slavery sometime in 1795, in Southampton County, Virginia. His actions helped him become a big part in how he shaped the court and slavery. When Dred scott was brought into free states while he was a slave he thought it to be wrong because they were free states. Dred scott argued they should restrict(to confine or keep within limits, as of space, action, choice, intensity, or quantity) the entrance of slave owners into free states if they have slaves with them, or that the slaves should be free if they enter a free state. This topic(a subject of conversation or discussion) made it up to the supreme court where Roger B. Taney(Chief justice of the supreme court) said that Dred Scott did not have any right to bring his…

    • 183 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Emerson’s widow. The next year the Missouri Supreme Court Decide to retried the case. In an 1850 retrial the St. Louis court ruled that Scott and his family were free.” Two years later the Missouri Supreme Court stepped in again, reversing their decision.Scott and his lawyer the brought the case to to federal court. “In 1854, the circuit court upheld the decision of the Missouri Supreme Court.” “After losing again in the federal district court, they went to the Supreme court in Dred Scott v.s Sandford.”(Wikipedia) Dred Scott had an argument that since he was in Illinois on free soil he should become a free citizen.” (Wikipedia) Scott claimed that him and John Sanford, who lived in New York, were citizens from different states. “The justices of the Supreme Court were biased regarding slavery. Seven of them had been appointed by pro slavery presidents, and five were families the owned slaves.”…

    • 1060 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Monumental Court Cases

    • 1731 Words
    • 7 Pages

    2. Dred Scott was a Missouri slave. Sold to Army surgeon John Emerson in Saint Louis around 1833, Scott was taken to Illinois, a free State, and on to the free Wisconsin Territory before returning to Missouri. When Emerson died in 1843, Scott sued Emerson's widow for his freedom in the Missouri supreme court, claiming that his residence in the “free soil” of Illinois made him a free man. After defeat in State courts, Scott brought suit in a local federal court. Eleven years after Scott's initial suit, the case came before the U.S. Supreme Court.…

    • 1731 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Dred Scott decision of 1857 is one of the most famous Supreme Court decisions because it declared that slaves could never become citizens of the United States. The Court’s 6-3 decision stated that the Constitution could not protect blacks and “blacks had no rights which the white man was bound to respect.” Since slaves could never become citizens they had no right to sue and Dred Scott remained a slave. The courts reputation following this decision plummeted to an all time low in the North and now Republicans of the time viewed the court as controlled by the Slave Power.…

    • 300 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Born into slavery in 1795 Dred Scott just seemed like every other black slave in the South, but down the road he would be one of the biggest influences in the civil rights movement and the progression of slavery. Dred Scott tried to earn his freedom in a very unusual ways for the black slaves back then, he fought like the white men would; in court. This case would later influence the South succeeding into the confederacy, and most certainly making a big point into slavery coming to an end.…

    • 773 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    In 1857, Dred Scott lost his case proving that he should be free because he had been held as a slave while living in a free state. The Court ruled that his petition couldn’t be seen because he did not own property. But it went further, to state that even though he had been taken by his 'owner' into a free state, he was still a slave because slaves were to be considered property of their owners. This decision furthered the cause of abolitionists as they increased their efforts to fight against slavery.…

    • 537 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    In 1857, a slave named Dred Scott went to the north with his owner. While the two men got to the north the Scott’s owner died. From this Scott looked at himself as a free man. He even sued for freedom. He argued that if is owner died in a free territory that would make him a free man. Scott went to the Supreme Court to defend his freedom. The court ruled seven to two that Dred Scott was not a free man and he had to return to slavery. Scott grew with anger and still believed he should be free. The court’s decision was final and Scott was later forced back into slavery. During the Dred Scott case Chief Justice ruled that the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional and he decided to abolish it.…

    • 134 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Dred Scott was a person that sued for his freedom. In 1847 Dred Scott first went to trial to sue for his freedom. Ten years after the case was brought before the United States Supreme Court the Court decided that all people of African Ancestry slaves as well as all free slave could never become a citizen of the United States. they couldn't sue in federal Court and The United States Supreme Court also ruled that the federal Court did not have the power to permit slavery in its territories.…

    • 545 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Dred Scott Decision Essay

    • 812 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Dred Scott was a slave in Missouri, which had been a slave state since the Missouri Compromise was passed in 1820.…

    • 812 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In the time around the dred scott cases slavery was banned in some states via the missouri compromise. Dred Scott had been living in along with his family had lived in a U.S territory where slavery was banned. Scott argued that since he had lived in that territory for a while that he and his family should have ultimately been granted freedom. Dred Scott also tried to sue for the wages that had been held from him while the case had been in motion which ended in the court ruling in favor of John Sanford.…

    • 552 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Slavery was at the root of the case of Dred Scott v. Sandford. Dred Scott sued his master to obtain freedom for himself and his family. His argument was that he had lived in a territory where slavery was illegal; therefore he should be considered a free man. Dred Scott was born a slave in Virginia around 1800. Scott and his family were slaves owned by Peter Blow and his family. He moved to St. Louis with them in 1830 and was sold to John Emerson, a military doctor. They went to Illinois and the Wisconsin territory where the Missouri Compromise of 1820 prohibited slavery. Dred Scott married and had two daughters. John Emerson married Irene Sanford. In 1842, they all returned to St. Louis, Missouri. John Emerson died the next year. In 1846, Scotts sued Irene Emerson for their freedom. The Scott’s stay in free territories gave them the ability to sue for their freedom. However, they did not do this while they were living there (Dred Scott’s Fight).…

    • 844 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Better Essays

    Dred Scott was a former slave that claimed he was a free man due to his master (deceased) taking him into free territory. The court decided that he was not technically a citizen, therefore he could not sue. This is the court decision that ultimately deemed all slaves as property, and guaranteed they had no rights and a white man didn’t have to respect them, as a free black or a slave. “In the case of Dred Scott v. Sandford(1857), the court ruled that even residence on free soil did not render a slave a free person, for, regardless of their status, black people had “no rights which the white man was bound to respect.” (Jones 342)…

    • 1093 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays