The Project Gutenberg EBook of Report of the Decision of the Supreme Court
of the United States, and the Opinions of the Judges Thereof, in the Case of Dred Scott versus John F.A. Sandford, by Benjamin C. Howard

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or
re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org

Title: Report of the Decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, and the Opinions of the Judges Thereof, in the Case of Dred Scott versus John F.A. Sandford
December Term, 1856.

Author: Benjamin C. Howard

Release Date: February 27, 2010 [EBook #31425]

Language: English

Character set encoding: ASCII

*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK CASE OF DRED SCOTT ***

Produced by Meredith Bach, Linda Cantoni, and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This
book was produced from scanned images of public domain
material from the Google Print project.)

[Transcriber's Note: A Table of Contents has been created for the
reader's convenience. Minor, obvious printer errors have been
corrected without note. Other questionable text is marked by a
[Transcriber's Note].]

REPORT

OF

THE DECISION

OF THE

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES,

AND THE

OPINIONS OF THE JUDGES THEREOF,

IN THE CASE OF

DRED SCOTT

VERSUS

JOHN F.A. SANDFORD.

DECEMBER TERM, 1856.

BY BENJAMIN C. HOWARD,
FROM THE NINETEENTH VOLUME OF HOWARD'S REPORTS.

WASHINGTON:
CORNELIUS WENDELL, PRINTER.
1857.

CONTENTS

Syllabus
Mr. Chief Justice Taney (majority opinion)
Mr. Justice Wayne (concurrence)
Mr. Justice Nelson (concurrence)
Mr. Justice Grier (concurrence)
Mr. Justice Daniel (concurrence)
Mr. Justice Campbell (concurrence)
Mr. Justice Catron (concurrence)
Mr. Justice McLean (dissent)
Mr. Justice Curtis (dissent)

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES.
DECEMBER TERM, 1856.

DRED SCOTT

VERSUS

JOHN F.A. SANDFORD.

DRED SCOTT, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, _v._ JOHN F.A. SANDFORD.

This case was brought up, by writ of error, from the Circuit
Court of the United States for the district of Missouri.

It was an action of trespass _vi et armis_ instituted in the
Circuit Court by Scott against Sandford.

Prior to the institution of the present su