In this speech, delivered in the state House of Representatives, Lincoln charged Pierce, Buchanan, Taney and Douglas with conspiracy to secure the Dred Scott decision.
The carrying out of the treaty dred Days.
Curtis as counsel for the plaintiff in the Dred Scott case in 1857.
The acquisition of Louisiana in 1803, which gave a new field for the growth of the slave power, though not made in its interest, the Missouri Compromise (1820), the annexation of Texas (1845), the Fugitive Slave Law (1850), the Kansas-Nebraska bill (1854), the Dred Scott decision (1857), the attempts to acquire Cuba (especially in 1854) and to reopen the foreign slave trade (1859-1860), were the principal steps - only some of them successful - in its career of aggression.
The Kansas question and the attitude of the North toward the decision in the Dred Scott case were arousing the South when he was inaugurated the first time, and in his inaugural address he clearly indicated that he would favour secession in the event of any further encroachment on the part of the North.
This adroit attempt to reconcile the principle of popular sovereignty with the Dred Scott decision, though it undoubtedly helped Douglas in the immediate fight for the senatorship, necessarily alienated his Southern supporters and assured his defeat, as Lincoln foresaw it must, in the presidential campaign of 1860.
On the 26th of June 1857 Lincoln in a speech at Springfield answered Douglas's speech of the 12th in which he made over his doctrine of popular sovereignty to suit the Dred Scott decision.
In consequence, although the high judicial character of the men appointed and the lawyers' regard for precedent served to keep the court in the path marked out by Marshall and Story, the state sovereignty influence was occasionally manifest, as, for example, in the opinion (written by Taney) in the Dred Scott case (18 57, 19 Howard, 393)393) that Congress had no power to abolish slavery in territory acquired after the formation of the national government.
The amendment was never actually adopted by Congress, and was in fact expressly repudiated in the Compromise of 1850, and its content declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in the Dred Scott case.
It is true she had dec e finitely freed her territory from the stranger, and qu~ces of through the sorrows of defeat and the menace of the Nun- disruption had fortified her national solidarity, and dred defined her patriotism, still involved in and not yet dissociated from loyalty to the monarchy.