Dred Scott )versusvs. ) Irene Emerson ) IN THE------------------- ) . Louis Circuit Court
Take Notice, That on the tenth---------------- day of May, 1847, between the hours of 8 o’clock in the forenoon, and 6 o’clock in the afternoon of that day, at the dwelling house of , NumberNo. 90 Myrtle Street , in the,------------------------ ---------------, --------------------, depositions will be taken to be read on the trial of the above entitled cases on behalf of the plaintiff; and that the taking of said depositions, if not completed on that day, will be continued from day, to day at the sameplace, and between the same hours, until completed.To the above named defendant ) C. D. Drake ,) AttorneyAtty for PlaintiffsPltffs.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harriet (of color) )versusvs. ) Irene Emerson ) IN THE------------------- ) . Louis Circuit Court
Take Notice, That on the tenth---------------- day of May, 1847, between the hours of 8 o’clock in the forenoon, and 6 o’clock in the afternoon of that day, at the dwelling house of , NumberNo. 90 Myrtle Street , in the,------------------------ ---------------, --------------------, depositions will be taken to be read on the trial of the above entitled cases on behalf of the plaintiff; and that the taking of said depositions, if not completed on that day, will be continued from day, to day at the sameplace, and between the same hours, until completed.To the above named defendant ) C. D. Drake ,) AttorneyAtty for PlaintiffsPltffs.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dred Scott )versusvs. ) Irene Emerson ) IN THE------------------- ) . Louis Circuit Court Harriet (of Color) )versusvs. ) Irene Emerson )
Take Notice, That on the fourteenththirteenth_____day of May-------- 1847, between the hours of 8 o’clock in the forenoon, and 6 o’clock in the afternoon of that day, at the office of Charles D. Drake,--------------------------- in the,------------------------ ---------------, --------------------, depositions will be taken to be read on the trial of the above entitled cases on behalf of the plaintiffs; and that the taking of said depositions, if not completed on that day, will be continued from day, to day at the sameplace, and between the same hours, until completed.To the above named defendant ) C. D. Drake ,) AttorneyAtty for PlaintiffsPltffs.
I acknowledge service of a copy of the within notice in the , this 10th day of May, 1847.
DEPOSITIONSof witnesses, produced, sworn, and examined, at the dwelling house of , NumberNo. 90 Myrtle Street in the City and County of ; , before me, , Law Commissioner for the said County, in a certain cause now pending in the Saint Louis Circuit Court in the , between Dred Scott , plaintiff, and Irene Emerson , defendant, on the part of the Plaintiff C---- of the , of lawful age, being duly sworn and examined on the part of the Plaintiff deposeth and saith:---
I know Dred Scott , Plaintiff in the above case. During the years1837 and 1838, I knew him as a Slave. at , at the mouth of . on the west side of the . within the Territorial limits of the . Said Scott at this time was held as a slave by a Doctor Emerson , a Surgeon in the United States Army, who was then posted at . I knew the Plaintiff to be held for only one year by Said Emerson , as a Slave. During that time Said Emerson exercised control over, and used Plaintiff entirely as a Slave. Since that time I have only seen Plaintiff occasionally. I know Harriet , the wife of PlaintiffPlaint Said Dred Scott . X I first knew her at . She too was a Slave of Doctor Emerson at the Same time that I knew Dred . there. This woman, in the year 1837 was hired to me as a servant by Doctor Emerson , and was in my family some two or three months. I knew Said woman for the same length of time that I did ^ Dred.During that whole time She was held in Slavery by Doctor Emerson . When I went to to live, I found Doctor Emerson posted there. How long he had been there I do not know. Doctor Emerson . left , in the fall of 1837, but left these slaves there. hire out. They remained there until April 1838, when they left for the South, - for . I think. During the whole time that I knew them at they were held in Slavery by Doctor Emerson , or by persons to whom they were hired by him. They were universally known there to be Doctor Emersons Slaves. At the time that I was at my name was Thompson . I was then the wife of , Xa Lieutenant in the army of the . The Plaintiffs in these cases are now in St. Louis ; and I have been informed and believe, are at W. Samuel Russell’s. I went to in the latter part of May, or first of June, 1837. and left in May, 1838.
e------------
I, Jno. H. Watson, "The Law Commissioner of Saint Louis County", in the , do hereby certify that , the deponent, whose place of residence is the , in the , was by me Sworn to testify the whole truth of her knowledge, touching the matter in [illegible]in the Cause aforesaid; that deponent was examin [ed], and her examination reduced to writing by me, and Inscribed by Said deponent in my presence, on the tenth day of May A.D. 1847, between the hours of 8 o’clock in the forenoon and 6 o’clock in the afternoon, at the residence of , numberNo. 90 Myrtle Street , in the , in the .
In testimony whereof I have hereunto Inscribed my name and affixed my official seal, on this tenth day of May, A.D. 1847.
Jno. H. Watson.Deposition
Dred Scott .versusvs. Irene Emerson .-----------------------
Commissioner Leer[?]Fee $1.50.Paid by Dred Scott AttorneyAtty. for Plaintiff.
Depositions of witnesses, produced, sworn, and examined at the office of Charles D. Drake, in the , & , before me, the undersigned, , a justice of the peace within & for the aforesaid, in two certain causes now pending in the Circuit Court , within & for the said , , in one of which causes Dred Scott is plaintiff and Irene Emerson is defendant, and in the other of said causes Harriet (of color) is plaintiff & the said Irene Emerson is defendant, on the part of the plaintiffs.
c x of lawful age, being produced, sworn & examined on the part of the plaintiffs, deposes & says:— I know the negro man named Dred , who is the plaintiff in this suit. I first knew Dred some time in the year 1834 , at , Illino in the . He was then a servant belonging to Doctor Emerson , who was there an Assistant Surgeon in the Army of the United States , and was stationed at . He was held in service there by Doctor Emerson as a slave from the time I first knew him, until April or May 1836. At that time, was evacu ^ ated by the troops, to which was attached, and the troops with Doctor Emerson went from to , which is situated at the junction of the with the , on the west side of the Mississippi , within the Territorial limits of the and North of the . From the time the troops arrived at until the 7th day of July 1837. I knew Dred to be held by Doctor Emerson , as a slave, at . At the last mentioned date I left that place. During all the time I knew Dred at
and , he was claimed by Doctor Emerson as a slave and used by him as such. During the time I have mentioned, I was in the Army of the United States , and attached to the same troops, to which Doctor Emerson was attached.
I am now Second Lieutenant in ’s Company of Volunteers known as the " Missouri Guards," raised for service in , and expect, probably some time next week the Company will leave for its destination. Further he saith not.
X
)[illegible abbreviation] I. , a Justice of the Peace within and for the County aforesaid, do hereby certify that , the above named deponent was by me sworn to testify the whole truth of his knowledge, touching the matter in controversy in the causes aforesaid; And that his deposition was reduced to writing and subscribed by him in my presence, on the thirteenth day of May, 1847, between the hours of eight o’clock in the forenoon And Six o’clock in the afternoon, at the Office of Charles D. Drake in the , in the and .
Given under my hand May 13th 1847.Justice of the Peace
Fee $ 1.00 paidpd. by Dred Scott , plaintiffplff.
Dred Scott versusvs. ) Irene Emerson --------------------
Harriet of Colorversusvs. ) Irene Emerson --------------------
Depositions for plaintiff
To . U.S.A.
GREETING:You are hereby commanded, that setting aside all manner of excuse and delay, you appear be-fore our Circuit Court for the county aforesaid, on the 30th day of June, inst[?]at the City of St. Louis , then and there totestify, and the truth to say in a certain matter of controversy now pending in our said Court,wherein Dred Scott isplaintiff and Irene Emerson isdefendant on the part of plaintiffand herein you are in no wise to fail.Witness, , Clerk of our said Court, with the seal thereof hereto affixed, at office, in the City of St. Louis , this 24th — day of June in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and forty- seven
Jno. Ruland Clerk Circuit Court C.C.Dred Scott versusvs.Emmerson-----------------------------------
WitnesesWitnesses for plaintiff
X 30
||
X 29
X 30
X 28
X 28
||
Executed June 30th 1847 by reading Thos. O Flaherty Thos . Gray & (M H Clark & not found
SheriffBy Geo N. StevensDeputyDepty
Fee $2.70
testify, and the truth to say in a certain matter of controversy now pending in our said Court,wherein Dred Scott is-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------plaintiff and Irene Emerson ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------defendant on the part of plaintiffplff----------------------------------------------------------------------------------and herein you are in no wise to fail.
Witness, , Clerk of our said Court, with the seal thereof hereto affixed, at office, in the City of St. Louis , this 26 — day of June in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and forty- 7
Jno. Ruland Clerk Circuit Court C.C.versusvs.
Emmerson
forthwith —
X X Executed June 30th 1847 by reading
SheriffBy Geo N. StevensDeputyDepty
Fee $1.001020 50 25 30------------ $11.25 420 50 25 30--------------- 5.25
Witness, , Clerk of our said Court, with the seal thereof hereto affixed, at office, in the City of St. Louis , this 30th — day of June ^ in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and forty- seven
Jno. Ruland Clerk Circuit Court C.C.Executed by reading June 30th 1847SheriffShffBy DeputyService 50 cts
Now at this day comes the plaintiffs in the above causes and moves the Court to set aside the verdict [rendered] in their cause for the following reasons
1 Because said verdict is against [law] the evidence2 Because said verdict is against law & evidence3 Because the verdict is against the weight of evidence,S M Bayattorneyatty for plaintiffsMotionMo for new trial
Filed June 30. 1847
John Jno . Ruland clerk
Harriet (of color) )vs. ) Irene Emerson )
Now at this day comes the said plaintiffs & [illegible] additional reasons for moves the Court to set aside the verdict rendered herein & grant a new trials in the above entitled Causes for the for the follow reason, in addition to the reasons mentioned in the motion here before filed to wit; Because the said plaintiffs were suprised by the ^ testimonyevidence of the witness Russell who testified in ther Cause.
S M Bayattorneyatty for plaintiffsplffsDred Scott , the plaintiff in this Cause in Support of his motion for a new trial[,]States upon oath. That he was Surprised in the testimony of the witness , by whom he expected to move that he, this affiant, was hired as a Salon by Said Russell from the defendant, previous to the Commencement of this Suit, & that Said Russell Paid to Said defendant money for the hire of this affiant as a X Slave, and that he did not know previous to, or as [illegible] the trial of Said Cause that he could ^proveXSaid facts, or Could prove that he was claimed as a Slave or held in Slavery by Said defendant, by any other person than Said Russell , and therefore relied solely upon the testimony of Said Russell to prove Such facts as now necessary to maintain Said Suit of which Said defendant, is the person holding this affiant in Slavery. XThis affiant in support of this affidavit makes an exhibit of a certain letter addressed to Said Russell by J.R. Lackland one of the Counsel of this affiant & the answer of Said Russell to the Said letter —from which it will appear, that previous to Said trial Said Russell informed Said Lackland that he Said Russell hired this affiant in March 1846.
from the defendant & that he Said Russell Paid the Said hire of this affiant to Said defendant.
This affiant further states that relying solely upon the testimony of Said Russell to prove these facts & knowing no other person by whom he could prove the same facts, or other facts tending to the Same [ends], he went into trial. When to his Surprise Said Russell testifyed in effect that he did not hire this affiant from XSaid defendant, nor did he pay Said hire to Said defendant, for that his Knowledge of such facts was solely derived from the information of his Wife. This affiant thus taken by surprise in the testimony of Said Russell [,] was unable to establish Said facts to the Satisfaction of the Jury, for which reason, he supposes, a verdict was rendered against him.
This affiant states that previous to said trial he had no knowledge that the Wife of Said Russell had any knowledge that this affiant was held in Slavery by Said defendant but that if a new trial is granted to him he expects to prove by the testimony of the Wife of Said Russell that Said defendant, previous to the Commencement of Said Suit hired this affiant to the Wife of Said Russell ,
acting as the agent of her Said husband, and that her acts in this ocassion were ratifyed & approved by her Said husband & that Said defendant Claimed this affiant as her Slave.
This affiant avers that previous to Said trial he had no knowledge that the Wife of Said Russell , or any other person ^ than Said Russell had any knowledge that this affiant was held in Slavery by Said defendant.
This affiant avers that the facts [illegible] in his petition to sue for his freedom are true. That he was & is a free man & was at the time of the Commencement of this Suit held in Slavery by Said defendant [.] That the verdict against this affiant is unjust & oppressive tending to the [...]tion of rights to which he is entitled by the laws of the land. And that upon a new Xtrial he will be able to establish his right to freedom & to prove that he was & is unjustly & unlawfully held in Slavery by Said defendant.
his Dred X Scott mark24th July 1847. Jno. Ruland clerk
--------------------
Affidavit of Dred Scott an application for a new trial
---------
Filed July 24th 1847 Jno. Ruland clerk
The plaintiff Elects to take a new Trial
Field & Hallfor plaintiffplffNow at this day come again they parties aforesaid by their respective attornies, and the Court here being now sufficiently advised of and concerning the premises, do consider and adjudge that the judgmen said plaintiff take nothing by her writ of error sued out in the ab[ove entit]led cause— but that the said writ be dismissed, and [that] the said go thereof without day and recover of the said plaintiff his costs an[d char]ges herein expended and have thereof execution.
State of Missouri
I, Clerk of the Supreme Court of the State of Missouri , do hereby certify that the foregoing is a full and complete transcript of the judgment of said Supreme Court , rendered at its March Term 1848, in the Case of Irene Emerson Plaintiff in error, and Dred Scott (of Color) defendant in error, —from t[he] Louis Circuit Court .
In testimony whereof I hereunto set out my hand and affix the seal of said Court, at office, in the City of Jefferson , the 24th of July anno dominiAD 1848.
H.S. Boon
Dismissed at Costs of PlaintiffPltff.
Filed Dec. 11th 1848. Jno. Ruland Clerk
EMMERSON v. HARRIET (of color.)
1. A writ of error will not lie to a judgment granting a new trial; it is no final judgment.2. Nor can the improper granting a new trial be assigned for error.
ERROR to St. Louis Circuit Court .
This is an action to try the right of Harriet to her freedom. There was a verdict for the defendant. Afterwards, a motion for a new trial was made and sustained. An exception was taken by the defendant to the granting of the motion, which being overruled she has brought the cause here by writ of error.
From the foregoing statement of facts, it is clear, that there is no final judgment, upon which a writ of error can only lie. The cause is still pending in the court below. Moreover, the case of Helm v. Bassett, 9 Mo. R. 52, settles the point that the granting of a new trial cannot be assigned for error. a The other Judges concurring, the writ will be dismissed.
The other Judges concurring, the writ will be dismissed.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This case is in all respects similar to that of Emmerson v. Harriet , decided at this term, and a similar disposition is made of it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~==========================================================
Irene Emerson )vs. ) Envoi[?]Error to Louis Circuit Court . Harriet (Colored woman )
Now at this day come again they parties aforesaid by their respective attornies, and the Court here being now sufficiently advised of and concerning the premises, do consider and adjudge that the said plaintiff take nothing by her writ of error sued out in the above entitled cause — but that the said writ be dismissed, and that the said go thereof without day and recover of the said plaintiff his costs and charges herein expended and have thereof execution.
State of Missouri
I, Clerk of the Supreme Court of the State of Missouri , do certify that the foregoing is a full and complete transcript of the judgment of said Supreme Court , rendered at its March Term 1848, in the case of Irene Emerson Plaintiff in error, and Harriet (Colored woman) defendant in error, from the Louis Circuit Court .
In testimony whereof I hereunto set out my hand and affix the seal of said Court, at office, in the City of Jefferson , the 24th of July anno dominiAD 1848.
H.S. Boon
Reversed + dismissed
Filed Dec. 11th 1848.
Jno. Ruland Clerk