ated that Congress could not prohibit slavery in the United States
territories, mainly speaking of the Midwestern territories. During the
1850's in the United States, Southern support of slavery and Northern
opposition to it collided more violently than ever before over the case
of Dred Scott, a black slave from Missouri who claimed his freedom
on the basis of seven years of residence in a free state and a free
territory. When the outweighed proslavery Supreme Court of the
United States heard Scott's case, they that not only was he still a
slave, but that the main law ensuring that slavery would not enter the
new Midwestern territories of the United States. This decision sent
the US into fights between the disagreeing groups. The chaos would
end only after a long and bloody civil war fought primarily over the
issue of slavery and its extension into the Midwestern territories. The
Supreme Court's ruling in Dred Scott v. Sandford helped accelerate
the arrival of the American Civil War by intensifying the already tense
relationship between Northerners and Southerners.
Dred Scott was the slave of a United States Army surgeon,
John Emerson of Missouri. Missouri was a state that permitted
slavery, so there was no law that was broken. In 1834, Dred Scott
went with Emerson to live in Illinois, which also prohibited slavery.
They later lived in the Wisconsin Territory, but slavery was forbidden
by the Missouri Compromise. The Missouri Compromise was a plan
agreed upon the United States Congress in 1820 to settle the debate
over slavery in the Louisiana Purchase area. The plan temporarily
maintained the balance between free and slave states. In 1838, Dred
Scott and Emerson returned to Missouri. Emerson died five years
later, and in 1846, Dred Scott sued the surgeon's widow for his
freedom. Unlike the states in the South, Missouri enacted slave laws
that wer...