" [3] .
These charges brought against Mrs. Emerson would surely have been dropped if it was not for the Missouri Compromise. Where in this compromise the question was, "should slavery be allowed in the new state of Missouri?" [4] The answer to that question was not clear, but was resolved in a two-part compromise. Firstly, Missouri gained admission to the Union as a slave state. However, this was off-set with portions of the Louisiana Territory lying North of the 36' 30' north latitude would be "free", or with out slavery. The second provision was that Main was also admitted to the Union, maintaining the balance of free and slaves states. The importance of the Missouri Compromise to the Dred Scott decision/case lies in where the Emerson family resided in the 12+ years in which they owned the Scott family.
The Scott family came to be Dr. Emerson's slave in the year 1830, where for 12 years there after, he accompanied the Emersons to posts in Illinois and the Wisconin Territory, where congress prohibited slavery under the rules of the Missouri Compromise. After Dr. Emerson's death, Mrs. Emerson hired out the Scott family (including his children) to work for other families in St. Louis. Because of the residence of Dred Scott, and his family, at the time at which he filed suit against Mr. Emerson, he and his wife were considered by the St. Louis circuit court to be free people. The St. Louis circuit courts acknowledged this when considering the petitions brought against Mrs. Emerson, "And the said plantiff avers, that before and at the time of the committing of the said grievances, [he/she] was and still is a free person and that the said defendant held and still holds [him/her] in slavery: To the plaintiff damages ten dollars and therefore he brings suit etc." [3] However, the recognition by the St. Louis courts was not enough to maintain the Scott's freedom.
In 1847, The Circuit Court ruled in favor of Mrs.