Skip to Content

Speech

	SATURDAY, MARCH 3, 2007
	150th ANNIVERSARY OF THE DRED SCOTT DECISION OLD COURT HOUSE, DOWNTOWN ST. LOUIS
Congressman Wm. Lacy Clay
	GOOD MORNING EVERYONE, AND THANK YOU FOR THAT WARM WELCOME. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, BOYS AND GIRLS, IT IS AN HONOR TO BE PART OF THIS HISTORIC ANNIVERSARY. I WANT TO THANK SUPERINTENDENT O’DELL AND ALL OF MY FRIENDS AT THE NATIONAL PARKS SERVICE FOR INVITING ME TO BE HERE. IT’S ALSO A GREAT PLEASURE TO APPEAR ON A PROGRAM WITH MY GOOD FRIEND, CIRCUIT CLERK MARIANO FAVAZZA AND OUR WONDERFUL MISSOURI SECRETARY OF STATE, ROBIN CARNAHAN. MADAME SECRETARY, ITS GOOD TO BE WITH YOU THIS MORNING. I’M REALLY PLEASED TO SEE THAT WE HAVE SOME YOUNG PEOPLE WITH US TODAY. EVERY TIME I START TO GET WORRIED ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THIS COUNTRY, I FEEL BETTER WHEN I HEAR THE WORDS OF BRIGHT YOUNG STUDENTS WHO ACTUALLY TOOK THE TIME TO STUDY THEIR HISTORY. AREN’T THESE ESSAYS WONDERFUL! LET’S GIVE OUR STUDENTS ANOTHER ROUND OF APPLAUSE. (lead applause for kids) I’VE BEEN ASKED TO GIVE YOU SOME THOUGHTS ABOUT THE HISTORIC IMPACT OF SCOTT V. SANFORD… A CASE BETTER KNOWN AS THE LANDMARK DRED SCOTT DECISION OF 1857, WHICH WAS ORIGINALLY FILED RIGHT HERE. AS YOU KNOW, THE PLAINTIFF, DRED SCOTT, WAS A SLAVE IN ST. LOUIS, WHO SUED FOR HIS FREEDOM IN 1847. THIS CASE NOT ONLY CHANGED CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, IT LAID OUT THE FOUNDATION FOR THREE OF THE MOST CLIMACTIC EVENTS IN AMERICAN HISTORY…THE CIVIL WAR, THE PASSAGE OF THE 14TH AMENDMENT,AND THE ROOTS OF THE MODERN CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT. NOW YOU MIGHT WONDER HOW ONE SUPREME COURT CASE THAT ORIGINATED IN ST. LOUIS COULD HAVE SUCH A PROFOUND INFLUENCE ON FUTURE EVENTS. TO FULLY EXPLORE THAT WOULD TAKE US SEVERAL SEMESTERS. BUT SINCE WE ONLY HAVE A FEW MINUTES, TRY TO THINK ABOUT IT THIS WAY, IMAGINE THE UNITED STATES AS A HUGE LAKE. AND FROM TIME TO TIME, GIANT HISTORIC ROCKS ARE THROWN INTO THAT LAKE. AND THE RIPPLES TRAVEL ACROSS THE WATER AND ACROSS TIME, TO CHANGE THE COURSE OF HISTORY. THAT’S WHAT THIS CASE IS ALL ABOUT. THE IMPACT OF THE DRED SCOTT DECISION SURGED FORWARD, ACCELERATING THE FIRES OF THE CIVIL WAR, AND FUELING THE PASSAGE OF THE 13TH, 14TH AND 15TH AMENDMENTS DURING RECONSTRUCTION. AND THE ECHOS OF THE DRED SCOTT DECISION CAN BE HEARD THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE 20TH CENTURY IN CASES LIKE SHELLY V. KRAMER; A CASE THAT ALSO ORIGINATED HERE IN ST. LOUIS, WHICH ENDED RESTRICTED HOUSING COVENANTS IN CERTAIN NEIGHBORHOODS; TO BROWN V. BOARD OF EDUCATION, WHICH OUTLAWED SEGREGATION IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS; TO THE BREAKTHRU CIVIL RIGHTS LEGISLATION WHICH CONGRESS PASSED IN THE 1960’S… LANDMARK LAWS LIKE THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT, THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT, AND THE FAIR HOUSING ACT. THE DRED SCOTT DECISION WAS THE SPARK THAT STARTED ALL OF THAT BECAUSE IT FORCED THE COURTS AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO CONSIDER A CRITICAL QUESTION: DOES THE CONSTITUTION GUARANTEE THE SAME PROTECTIONS TO EVERY INDIVIDUAL? OR ARE CERTAIN CLASSES OF PEOPLE LESS DESERVING OF EQUAL PROTECTION UNDER THE LAW? THAT WAS THE CENTRAL QUESTION THEN, AND WE’RE STILL ASKING THAT QUESTION IN 2007. BUT TO REALLY UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT OF THE DRED SCOTT DECISION, FIRST, YOU NEED TO PUT YOURSELF IN THE CONTEXT OF THE TIMES, JUST BEFORE THE CIVIL WAR. ACTUALLY, IN THE BEGINNING, DRED SCOTT DIDN’T INTEND TO SUE ANYONE. HE JUST ASKED HIS OWNER FOR HER PERMISSION TO EARN MONEY SO THAT HE COULD PURCHASE FREEDOM FOR HIMSELF AND HIS WIFE, HARRIET. WHEN SHE REFUSED, HE FILED THE CASE IN 1847. THE BASIS OF HIS SUIT WAS THAT SINCE HE HAD BEEN PREVIOUSLY TAKEN FROM MISSOURI TO LIVE IN TWO FREE STATES: ILLINOIS AND WISCONSIN, HE COULD THEN NO LONGER LEGALLY BE ENSLAVED. IN FACT, BEFORE SCOTT V. SANFORD, THERE WERE NUMEROUS CASES IN MISSOURI WHERE SLAVES HAD SUED THEIR MASTERS AND WON THEIR FREEDOM. DRED SCOTT’S CASE TOOK OVER TEN YEARS TO WORK ITS WAY UP TO THE U.S. SUPREME COURT. AND THE DECISION AGAINST HIM SHOOK THE ENTIRE COUNTRY…BOTH NORTH AND SOUTH. TO GIVE YOU SOME IDEA OF WHY THE DECISION WAS SO SHOCKING, I WANT TO READ JUST A TINY PORTION OF THE MAJORITY OPINION WRITTEN BY CHIEF JUSTICE ROGER B. TANEY.  THIS IS TAKEN FROM THE RULING READ AT THE U.S. SUPREME COURT IN MARCH OF 1857. CHIEF JUSTICE TANEY SAID THIS: “OUR FOUNDERS BELIEVED THAT NEGROES WERE BEINGS OF AN INFERIOR ORDER, AND ALTOGETHER UNFIT TO ASSOCIATE WITH THE WHITE RACE; EITHER IN SOCIAL OR POLITICAL RELATIONS; AND SO FAR INFERIOR THAT THEY HAVE NO RIGHTS WHICH THE WHITE MAN IS BOUND TO RESPECT.” “NEGROS MIGHT JUSTLY AND LAWFULLY BE REDUCED TO SLAVERY FOR THEIR OWN BENEFIT, AND AS SUCH, BOUGHT OR SOLD AND TREATED AS ORDINARY ARTICLES OF MERCHANDIZE AND TRAFFIC, WHENEVER PROFIT COULD BE MADE BY IT.”  IN PLAIN ENGLISH, THAT MEANT THAT NEGROS WERE NOT CITIZENS. THEY WERE SOMETHING LESS THAN HUMAN, AND HAD NO RIGHTS UNDER THE LAW.  THAT’S PART ONE OF THE DECISION. THE OTHER VITAL PORTION OF THE RULING STRUCK DOWN A FEDERAL STATUTE CALLED THE MISSOURI COMPROMISE. I’M SURE THAT YOU COVERED THIS IN YOUR AMERICAN HISTORY CLASS.  IN 1820, CONGRESS PASSED THE MISSOURI COMPROMISE, WHICH ALLOWED MAINE TO ENTER THE UNION AS A FREE STATE, AND MISSOURI TO ENTER AS A SLAVE STATE. AND IT LIMITED THE EXPANSION OF SLAVERY IN CERTAIN AMERICAN TERRITORIES. BUT THE DRED SCOTT RULING STUCK DOWN THAT LAW, WHICH MEANT THAT IN PRACTICAL TERMS, SLAVERY WAS FREE TO EXPAND ANYWHERE, INCLUDING INTO THE SO-CALLED FREE STATES. SO NOW, WE HAD A BIG PROBLEM ACROSS THE COUNTRY BECAUSE THIS ARGUMENT ABOUT SLAVERY AND OTHER TENSIONS BETWEEN NORTH AND SOUTH HAD BEEN BUILDING UP FOR DECADES. AND ONE OF THE BEST WAYS TO UNDERSTAND THE GROWING DIVISIONS THAT WOULD EVENTUALLY ERUPT INTO CIVIL WAR IS TO LISTEN TO THE MEDIA REACTION TO THE DRED SCOTT DECISION, FROM BOTH PERSPECTIVES. HERE IS AN EXCERPT FROM THE AN EDITORIAL THAT APPEARED IN THE RICHMOND VIRGINIA ENQUIRER ON MARCH 17, 1857: “FOR MORE THAN FIFTY YEARS THE QUESTION OF SLAVERY HAS BEEN THE SUBJECT OF DISCORD, CONTENTION AND GROWING AGITATION.” “THE PEOPLE OF THE SOUTH VIEW THIS MOMENTOUS DECISION AS A VINDICATION OF ONE OF THE ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF OUR SOCIETY.  ITS MAINTENANCE IS VITAL TO THE PUBLIC GOOD.” “AND THE PROTECTION OF OUR RIGHTS ORIGINATING FROM IT IS THE GREAT GOD-GIVEN GUARANTEE OF FREEDOM FOR THE WHITE MAN THRU SUBJUGATION OF THE BLACK, WHICH IS THE DESTINY OF THE AFRICAN AND ANGLO-SAXON RACES AS DESIGNED AND DEGREED BY DIVINITY.” “IF THE PEOPLE OF THE NORTH WOULD CEASE TO HURL THUNDERBOLTS AND LET US ALONE AND LEAVE SLAVERY TO THE STATES, AND TO THE SAME PROTECTION ENJOYED BY ALL OTHER PROPERTY UNDER THE CONSTITUTION, THEN THIS AGITATION WOULD COME TO AN END IN AN INSTANT.” AND FROM THE NORTH, HERE IS A SHORT PORTION OF AN EDITORIAL, WHICH APPEARED IN THE NEW YORK TRIBUNE ON MARCH 12, 1857. “WE BESTOW ALL CENSURE ON THAT AWFUL CREATURE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE, AND HIS COHORTS WHO HAVE DRAGGED THEIR OFFICIAL ROBES INTO THE KENNELS OF SLAVE-BREEDING POLITICS.” “THIS DRED SCOTT DECISION IS DEFICIENT IN EVERY ELEMENT WHICH SHOULD ENTITLE IT TO RESPECT.  IT VIOLATES THE TRUTH OF HISTORY AND THE LOGIC OF THE LAW, AND WE MEAN TO ASSIST IN GETTING IT OVERRULED.” “WE HEAR MUCH OF THE DANGERS OF AGITATION. BUT WE KNOW OF ANOTHER DANGER FAR GREATER, AND THAT IS THE DANGER THAT OUR LIBERTIES MAY BE SUBVERTED, OUR RIGHTS TRAMPLED UPON; THE SPIRIT OF OUR INSTITUTIONS UTTERLY DISREGARDED, AND OUR GREAT EXPERIMENT IN FREEDOM TURNED INTO A DISASTROUS FAILURE.” SO YOU SEE, IF YOU THINK THE COUNTRY IS DIVIDED NOW, IT’S NOTHING WHEN COMPARED TO THE PERIOD JUST BEFORE THE CIVIL WAR. AND JUST LIKE TODAY, BACK THEN, POLITICIANS TOOK ADVANTAGE OF MAJOR COURT DECISIONS TO LAUNCH POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS AND TO MAKE A NAME FOR THEMSELVES. HERE IS A SMALL EXCERPT FROM A SPEECH BY A REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE FOR THE U.S. SENATE WHO LAUNCHED HIS CAMPAIGN RIGHT AFTER THE DRED SCOTT DECISION WAS ANNOUNCED. ON JUNE 26, 1857, U.S. SENATE CANDIDATE ABRAHAM LINCOLN SAID THIS: “THE DRED SCOTT DECISION IS ERRONEOUS ON ITS FACE.  IT DECLARES TWO PROPOSITIONS…FIRST, THAT A NEGRO CANNOT SUE IN THE U.S. COURTS; AND SECOND, THAT CONGRESS CANNOT PROHIBIT SLAVERY IN THE TERRITORIES.” “THE DECISION IS BASED ON HISTORICAL FACTS WHICH WERE NOT REALLY TRUE.  FOR INSTANCE, IN HIS MAJORITY OPINION, CHIEF JUSTICE TANEY STATES AT GREAT LENGTH THAT NEGROS WERE NO PART OF THE PEOPLE WHO MADE, OR FOR WHOM WAS MADE, THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, AND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES.” “THAT DEFIES ALL REASON AND HISTORICAL ACCOUNTS REGARDING NEGROS IN THE AMERICAS, WHO IN FACT PRECEDED OUR GREAT REVOLUTION BY AT LEAST A CENTURY.” “IT IS UNDENIABLE THAT THE NEGRO IS A MAN; THAT HIS BONDAGE IS CRUELLY WRONG, AND THAT THE FIELD OF HIS OPPRESSION SHOULD NOT BE ENLARGED.” SO WHAT IS LINCOLN REALLY SAYING HERE? YOU’LL NOTICE THAT HE DISAGREES WITH THE DRED SCOTT DECISION, AND THAT HE ARGUES THAT SLAVERY SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO SPREAD. BUT HE SAYS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ABOUT EMANCIPATION. THAT WOULDN’T HAPPEN FOR ANOTHER SIX YEARS. BUT IT’S CLEAR THAT BOTH THE SEEDS OF WAR AND EMANCIPATION HAD ALREADY BEEN PLANTED, AND THIS DECISION CAUSED THEM TO GROW QUICKLY. SO IN CLOSING, I WANT TO SAY THAT BEYOND THE OBVIOUS HISTORICAL LESSONS WHICH COME FROM THE DRED SCOTT DECISION, THERE IS AN EQUALLY IMPORTANT PERSONAL ASPECT OF THIS CASE THAT OCCURRED TO ME AS I WAS FLYING BACK TO ST. LOUIS. MY OWN FAMILY WAS BROUGHT TO MISSOURI IN BONDAGE, TO A FARM IN FRANKLIN COUNTY, IN 1842… JUST FIVE YEARS BEFORE DRED SCOTT FILED THIS CASE. AND AT THAT TIME IN ST. LOUIS, PEOPLE WHO LOOKED LIKE ME WERE BOUGHT AND SOLD, LIKE CATTLE, JUST A FEW FEET AWAY FROM HERE. SO THAT’S WHAT THIS CASE REALLY REPRESENTS… IT’S A MIRROR THAT REFLECTS THE MOST PAINFUL, THE MOST SHAMEFUL CHAPTER IN OUR COUNTRY’S HISTORY. AND YET, THIS ANNIVERSARY ALSO REPRESENTS THE HOPE OF JUST HOW FAR WE HAVE COME AS A NATION, AND HOW FAR WE STILL HAVE TO GO. THANK YOU. MAY GOD BLESS YOU. AND MAY GOD CONTINUE TO BLESS THE UNITED STATES. # #