e following
verdict, viz: "As to the first issue joined in this case, we of the jury
find the defendant not guilty; and as to the issue secondly above
joined, we of the jury find that before and at the time when, etc., in
the first count mentioned, the said Dred Scott was a negro slave, the
lawful property of the defendant; and as to the issue thirdly above
joined, we, the jury, find that before and at the time when, etc., in
the second and third counts mentioned, the said Harriet, wife of said
Dred Scott, and Eliza and Lizzie, the daughters of the said Dred Scott,
were negro slaves, the lawful property of the defendant."

Whereupon, the court gave judgment for the defendant.

After an ineffectual motion for a new trial, the plaintiff filed the
following bill of exceptions.

On the trial of this cause by the jury, the plaintiff, to maintain the
issues on his part, read to the jury the following agreed statement of
facts, (see agreement above.) No further testimony was given to the jury
by either party. Thereupon the plaintiff moved the court to give to the
jury the following instruction, viz:

"That, upon the facts agreed to by the parties, they ought to find for
the plaintiff. The court refused to give such instruction to the jury,
and the plaintiff, to such refusal, then and there duly excepted."

The court then gave the following instruction to the jury, on motion of
the defendant:

"The jury are instructed, that upon the facts in this case, the law is
with the defendant." The plaintiff excepted to this instruction.

Upon these exceptions, the case came up to this court.

It was argued at December term, 1855, and ordered to be reargued at the
present term.

* * * * *

It was now argued by Mr. Blair and Mr. G. F. Curtis for the plaintiff in
error, and by Mr. Geyer and Mr. Johnson for the defendant in error.

* * * * *

Mr. Chief Justice Taney delivered the opinion of the court.

This case has been twice argued. After the argument of the last term,
differences of opinion were found to exist among the members of the
court; and as the questions in controversy are of the highest
importance, and the court was at that time much pressed by the ordinary
business of the term, it was deemed advisable to continue the case, and
direct a reargument on some of the points, in order that we might have
an opportunity of giving to the whole subject a more deli