Different Dred Scot + no Harper's ferry

Had the Supreme Court found that Dred Scott was indeed free from having lived so long with his master in a free state

and

Had John Brown died in Kansas and the Harpers ferry raid not happened

How different would things be.

The South wouldbe less scared without Broiwn. The North woudl not have cause to fear an attempt to spread slavery

Would Republicans have won in 1860?

Would sessessionism be weaker?

Would the ACW be prevented, postponed or happen roughly as otl
 
Given that the Dred Scott decision was 7-2, its going to take some major changes to get it to go the other way.

And some such case was bound to come up.

Getting rid of John Brown is certainly possible, and while there were lots of fire eating abolitionists, im not sure anyone else would have dared raid a federal armoury to arm slaves...

Basically tensions had been growing for decades, with each side convinced they were in the right. SOME major explosion, even if not otls secession is probably inevitable.
 
I'm surprised something like the Dred Scott case didn't appear earlier. You have to look at it from a strictly legal stand point to see and let's just forget about the first part of the case, where the judge says Blacks aren't citizens, etc etc. The Constitution (or I should say the Bill of Rights) is quite clear when it says property can't be taken without due process. As Dred Scott was legally classified as property, he could not simply be taken away by the State his owner resided in. The State could have sued and dragged the owner into court and gone through due process. I doubt law enforcment in general cared enough about a slave to get up and make a case out of it.

Anyway, the point I was trying to make before rambling was that I'm surprised a similar case and ruling didn't appear far sooner. Slave owners were moving westward too.
 
Top