Famous Abolitionists.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Lincoln-Douglas Debates: Video (2:13)
Advertisements

Sectionalism What issues divided the country and the legislation that tried to keep the country together.
CHAPTER 16.3: THE DREDD SCOTT DECISION. FACTS 1.Dred Scott was a slave from Missouri. (MO) 2. Scott and his owner moved to Wisconsin for four years. 3.
Kansas-Nebraska Act Dred Scott Case Pages Workbook 88.
Review.
The Dred Scott Decision
Road to Civil War Challenges to Slavery p
Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857). Background: The Missouri Compromise 1803: U.S. purchases Louisiana Territory from France 1820: Compromise allows slavery.
 Dred Scott v. J. A. Sanford (1857).   Who was Dred Scott?  Events Affecting Dred Scott’s fate  Timeline of Events  The Two Sides of the Issue 
A Nation Divided Political Divisions Chapter 15, Section 3 Pages
The Court ruled that Scott's "sojourn" of two years to Illinois and the Northwest Territory did not make him free once he returned to Missouri.
Griffin Honeycutt Block 2 October 29,  Official Name- Dred Scott v. John F. A. Sandford  The defendant’s name was actually Sanford, but was misspelled.
By Alexander M. Barker. Born as a slave in the late 1700s Owned by the Blow family Parents are unknown Lived in Southampton County, VA Moved to Alabama;
By: Mireina Barrios. Dred Scott and Roger B. Taney Dred Scott, a slave who had his freedom at Illinois and the free territory of Wisconsin before moving.
APUSH – Spiconardi.   In the 1830s, Dred Scott, a slave, accompanied his owner from Missouri to Illinois and later the territory of Wisconsin  Scott.
Supreme Court Cases Setting the Precedent. John Marshall Helped make the Supreme Court the powerful institution it is today Presided over several important.
Lesson 18: The Union in Peril part 7
Dred Scott Decision (1857).
APUSH Review: Dred Scott v. Sanford Everything You Need to Know About Dred Scott v. Sanford To Succeed In APUSH
By Greg Munetz. He was born a slave in 1795 in Southampton County, Virginia He was industrious and intelligent, he served as a farmhand, a stevedore,
Tyler Kennedy Nick Logan.  Born a slave to the Blow family  Sold to Army Surgeon named Dr. John Anderson  Owner died then got a new owner  Lived in.
Dred Scott V. Sanford 1858 Julien Mercier and Kendal Kulp.
By: Mireina Barrios. Dred Scott and Roger B. Taney Dred Scott, a slave who had his freedom at Illinois and the free territory of Wisconsin before moving.
Review – QUIZ TOMORROW!!! Historical Terms 6.1. Missouri Compromise Compromise between the North and South on what to do in the Louisiana Territory Maine.
Dred Scott v. Sandford A Supreme Court Decision in 1857.
Slavery and Secession. The Birth of the Republican Party.
Dred Scott.  I can explain how the Dred Scott Court decision impacted African Americans during the time before the Civil War.
On your own and on the worksheet provided: 1) Write a definition for the word property. 2) List some examples of property.
Jump Start Explain how popular sovereignty was involved in the Kansas-Nebraska Act How did the Kansas-Nebraska Act lead to increased division between the.
 Dred Scott was a slave.  He had lived in a free territory with his owner.  His owner moved back into a slave state.  While there, the.
Political Divisions Chapter 15, Section 3.
Mexican War Missouri Compromise Nullification Kansas- Nebraska Act The Compromise of 1850 Dred Scott Decision Lincoln- Douglas Debates (1858)
Uncle Tom’s Cabin and Dred Scott
Chapter 14 The Nation Divided Section 3: The Crisis Deepens
Dred Scott Decision 1857.
Ch:14 The Nation Divided
UNIT 8.3 SLAVERY & POLITICS.
Challenges to Slavery Section Two.
Dred Scott.
Changing the Law of the Land
Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857)
Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857)
Opener – Copy into Notebook pp. 84
Chapter 14 section 3 The Crisis Deepens.
Background: Who was Dred Scott?
Challenges to Slavery 15-3
The Debate on Slavery Heats Up
FOA 2/29/16 1. What did the Kansas-Nebraska Act actually do?
PART 3.
FACING A NATIONAL PROBLEM
Review from last week Kansas-Nebraska Act: Kansas is almost ready to be a state- To slave or not? Stephan Douglas looked to avoid more issues so he proposes.
What causes of sectional conflict led to the Civil War?
What makes you an “American” citizen?
The Dred Scott Decision
Events that Helped Spark the Civil War By: Mrs. Andreatta
Political Divisions Chapter 18 - Section 3.
SSUSH9 The student will identify key events, issues, and individuals relating to the causes, course, and consequences of the Civil War. a. Explain the.
Westward Expansion: Institution of Slavery
Review.
And The case for freedom
NOTES: Causes of the Civil War
8X Tuesday Objective: Describe political developments in the US that led to Civil War. Agenda: Do Now: Explain the rise of the Republican Party.
Warm up: Review Previous Lessons
SSUSH9 The student will identify key events, issues, and individuals relating to the causes, course, and consequences of the Civil War. a. Explain the.
Dred Scott Decision (1857).
The Road to Civil War A Nation Divided Aim: What were the social
Review.
Challenges to Slavery Section Two.
The Freed Man Shall Not Be Free
Review.
Presentation transcript:

Famous Abolitionists

Dred Scott Decision: Dred Scott was a slave who sued for his freedom in a case presented to the Supreme Court of the United States in 1856. The case, Dred Scott v. Sandford, is one of the most famous cases of all time. Scott's lawyer argued that although he and his wife were slaves, since they had lived in the Illinois Territory (where their owner, Dr. John Emerson often traveled to), where slavery was illegal, they were entitled to their freedom. The case went through various local courts until it was heard by the U.S. Supreme Court. According to Chief Justice Roger Taney, Dred Scott and his wife were not entitled to bring the lawsuit before the Supreme Court because they were not official citizens of the United States. Seven out of the nine justices agreed. In essence, the court declared that Slaves had no rights and no claim to freedom. In addition, the court also ruled that the institution of slavery could not be prohibited in new territories, and that the Missouri Compromise of 1820 was unconstitutional (which prohibited slavery in some of the lands acquired on the Louisiana Purchase ). To abolitionists, the decision confirmed their fears that Southerners were intent on extending slavery throughout the nation. The ruling increased the tension between politicians in the North and the South and reduced the chance for any diplomacy or negotiations that may have prevented war.