Title: Harriet of color vs. Irene Emerson
Plaintiff: Scott, DredScott, Harriet
Defendant: Emerson, Irene
Date Filed:
Term: 1847
Cause of Action: TrespassFalse ImprisonmentAssault and Battery
Case Number:
Court: St. Louis Circuit Court
Publication Info: St. Louis, Missouri: Washington University in St. Louis, University Libraries
2011
Source: The original document is part of the Missouri State Archives St Louis Circuit Court collection.
Availability: Documents are in the public domain
Withdrawn 11th Decr 1847
Dred ScottDred Scott )
versus
vs
. )
Irene EmersonIrene Emerson )
Be it remembered that on the ^ 30th
[illegible]
day of July
June in the year 1847 the plaintiff of his Attorney filed a motion accompanied with reasons to set
aside the verdict of the Jury in the cause and that a new trial be granted him, and which motion and reasons are in the words and figures following to wit (here set out
the motion) and that on the 1st day of July thereafter the plaintiff by his Attorney by leave of the Court filed an additional reason in
support of his motion for a new trial and which
additional reason is in the words and figures following to wit (here set out the additional reason) and that on the twenty fourth day of July following there was filed an
affidavit in said cause purporting to be made by Dred ScottDred Scott the plaintiff in the suit in support of his motion for a new trial ^
(here set out the affidavit) and that on
the following and succeeding Term of the Court to wit at the November Term of the year 1847 on the [blank space on page]
day of November in said last mentioned year the
said motion came on to be heard and upon argument of Counsel was by the Court adjudged to be sustained and a new trial was granted to said plaintiff in said cause to which decision
of the Court sustaining said motions and granting a new trial in the cause the defendant by her Counsel excepted and now excepts,
and to preserve the evidence of which the Counsel for the defendant asks that this his bill of Exceptions may be signed sealed and
made a part of the record all which is done accordingly this [blank space] day of [blank space] November 1847
Alexander HamiltonA. Hamilton
Dred ScottDred Scott
versus
vs
.
IreneIrene Emmerson
Bill of Exceptions
filed
December
Decr
4th 1847
John RulandJno. Ruland
Withdrawn 11th Decr 1847
HarrietHarriet of color )
versus
vs
. )
IreneIrene Emmerson )
Be it remembered that on the 30th day of June in the year 1847 the plaintiff by her attorney filed a motion accompanied with reasons to set aside the
verdict of the Jury in the cause and that a new trial be granted her, and which motion and reasons are in the words and figures following to wit (here set out the motion)
and that on the 1st day of July thereafter the plaintiff by her Attorney by leave of the Court filed an additional reason in support of her motion for a new trial, and which
additional reason is in the words and figures following to wit (here set out the additional reason) and that on the twenty fourth day of July following there was filed an
affidavit in said cause purporting by to be made by
HarrietHarriet
Dred ScottDred Scott
the plaintiff in another suit pending ^ in said Court in the same facts ^
against the same defendant and which affidavit and the facts therein stated were by consent of Counsel, considered as applicable to the case of
HarrietHarriet
versus
vs
.
EmersonEmerson & to be considered by the Court as filed by
HarrietHarriet and sworn to by her in support of her motion for a new trial (here set out the affidavit) and that on the
following and succeeding Term of the Court to wit at the November Term of the year 1847 on the day of November in said last mentioned year the said motion
came on to be heard & upon argument of Counsel was by the Court
adjudged to be sustained and a new trial was granted to said plaintiff in said cause to which decision
of the Court sustaining said motion and granting a new trial in the cause the defendant by her Counsel excepted, and now except, and to preserve the evidence of which the
Counsel for the defendant asks that this his bill of Exceptions may be signed sealed and made a part of the Record all which is done accordingly this [blank space] day of December 1847
A. Hamilton
Harriet of color
versus
vs
.
IreneIrene Emmerson
Bill of Exceptions
In the . Louis Circuit CourtCircuit Court
Dred ScottDred Scott )
versus
vs
. )
IreneIrene Emmerson )
Be it remembered that on the trial of this cause the plaintiff to maintain the issue on his part and to establish his right to freedom read in evidence to the Jury ^
without objection
the depositions of and and which depositions are in the words and figures following to wit
(here insert them) and further to maintain the issue and to establish
the right to freedom called as a witness S Russell who being duly Sworn upon his oath testified as follows that
Dred ScottDred Scott and his wife HarrietHarriet with their chilccrn were hired by him from
Mrs Emmerson the wife of
Doctor
Dr
EmersonEmerson, that he had paid the
hire of these negroes to
Col Sandford
Colonel
ColSandford
. the father of Mrs Emmerson.
On cross Examination he stated that he did not hire the said negroes himself but that they had been hired by his wife or that his wife had made an arrangement with
Mrs Emmerson for them, that in fact all that he knew about it was from his wife other than he had paid the hire to
Col Sandford
Colonel
ColSandford
. , that he in fact knew nothing of the
hiring but what he had learned from his wife, that he paid the money to
Col Sandford
Colonel
ColSandford. ,
and supposed that it was for Mrs Emmerson, but that he did not know it
X a witness on part of plaintiff testified that plaintiff was formerly owned by the father of witness who sold him to
Doctor
Doct
. Emmerson
a witness on part of plaintiff testified that plaintiff was formerly owned by the father of witness who sold him to
Doctor
Doct
. Emmerson
The defendant offered no evidence and there was no other evidence presented
X
to the Jury who thereupon found a
ver= =dict
verdict
for the defendant, and afterwards on the
30th day of June in the year 1847 the plaintiff by his Attorney filed a
mo= =tion
motion
accompanied with reasons to set aside the verdict
of the Jury in the cause and that a new
trial be granted him and which motion and reasons are in the words and figures following to wit (here set out the motion etc.) and that on the 1st day of July thereafter
the plaintiff by his Attorney by leave of the Court filed an additional reason in support of his motion for a new trial and which additional reason is in the words and
figures following to wit (here set out the additional reason) and that on the twenty fourth day of July following there was filed an affidavit in said cause purporting
to be made by Dred ScottDred Scott the plaintiff in the suit in
sup= =port
support
of his motion for a new trial
(here set out the affidavit) and that on the following and succeeding
Term of the Court to wit at the November Term of the year 1847 on the [blank space] day of November in said last mentioned year the said motion came on to be
heard and upon argument to be sustained & a new trial was granted to said plaintiff in said cause to which decision of the Court sustaining said motion and granting a new trial in the
cause the defendant by her Counsel excepted and now excepts and to preserve the evidence of which the Counsel for the defendant asks that this his bill of Exceptions may be
signed sealed & made a part of the record all which is done accordingly
Alexander HamiltonA. Hamilton
Judge
Eighth District
8d
Dred ScottDred Scott
versus
vs
.
IreneIrene Emmerson
Bill of Exceptions
filed March 4th 1848
John RulandJno. Ruland clerk
In the . Louis Circuit CourtCircuit Court
HarrietHarriet a woman of color )
versus
vs
. )
IreneIrene Emmerson )
Be it remembered that on the trial of this cause the plaintiff to maintain the issue on her part and to establish her right to freedom read in evidence to the Jury without
obj= =tion
objection
the depositions of
and Catharine A Anderson, and which depositions are in the words
X and figures following to wit
(here insert them) and further to maintain the issue and to establish the right to
freedom called as a witness S. Russell who being duly sworn upon his oath testified as follows that
and his wife HarrietHarriet (the plaintiff in this suit) with their chilccrn were hired by
him from Mrs Emmerson the wife of
Dr EmersonEmerson, that he had paid the hire of these negroes to
Col Sandford
Colonel
ColSandford. the father of Mrs Emmerson.
On Cross Examination he stated that he did not hire the said negroes himself but that they had been hired by his wife or that his wife had made an arrangement with
Mrs Emmerson for them, that in fact all that he knew about it was from his wife other than he had paid the hire to
Col Sandford
Colonel
ColSandford. , that he in fact knew nothing of the hiring,
but what he had learned from his wife, that he paid the money to
Col Sandford
Colonel
ColSandford. ,
and supposed that it was for Mrs Emmerson, but that he did not know.
X a witness on part of plaintiff testified that plaintiff was formerly owned by the father of witness who sold him to
Doctor
Doct
. Emmerson
The defendant offered no evidence, and there was no other evidence offered to the Jury who thereupon found a verdict for the defendant.
And afterwards on the 30th day of June in the year 1847 the plaintiff by her Attorney filed a motion accompanied with reasons to set aside the verdict of the
Jury in the cause, and that a new trial be granted her and which motion and reasons are in the words and figures following to wit (here set X ^
out the motion etc.)
and that on the 1st day of July thereafter the plaintiff by her Attorney by leave of the Court filed an additional reason in support of his motion for a new trial,
and which additional reason is in the words and figures following to wit (here set out the additional reason) and that on the twenty fourth day of July following
there was filed an affidavit in said cause purporting X to be made by the plaintiff in a suit against the same defendant,
pending in said court, and which
was also considered as on file in the present cause in support of the motion for a new trial (here set out the affidavit) and that on the following and succeeding
term of the Court to wit at the November Term of the year 1847 on the [blank space] day of November in said last mentioned year the said motion came on to be
heard and upon argument of Counsel was by the Court adjudged to be sustained
& a new trial was granted to said plaintiff X in the cause to which decision of the Court sustaining said motion and granting a new trial in the cause the
defendant by her Counsel
excepted and now excepts and to preserve the evidence of which the Counsel for the defendant asks that this his bill of Exceptions may be signed sealed
& made a part of the Record all which is done accordingly
Alexander HamiltonA. Hamilton
Judge
Eight District
8d
HarrietHarriet a woman of color
versus
vs
.
IreneIrene Emmerson
Bill of Exceptions
filed March 4th 1848
John RulandJno. Ruland clerk
In the Circuit CourtSt. Louis Circuit Court
Dred ScottDred Scott )
versus
vs
. )
IreneIrene Emmerson )
The defendant by her Attorney moves the Court that on order be made in this cause directing the Sheriff of the County to take the
said plaintiff and hire him out during the pendency of this suit, and also that he be directed to take from the person so hiring a bond in sufficiently penalty
^ & with sufficient security to pay the hire of said slave, & to abide the determination of this
suit and to produce him according as the judgment of the Court may require.
G W GoodeG.W. Goode
Attorney
Atty
for defendant
In the Circuit CourtCircuit Court
Dred ScottDred Scott
versus
vs
.
IreneIrene Emmerson
Motion
filed March 14th 1848
John RulandJno. Ruland clerk
In the Circuit CourtSt. Louis Circuit Court
HarrietHarriet of Color )
versus
vs
. ) Suit for Freedom
IreneIrene Emmerson )
The defendant by her Attorney moves the Court that an order be made in this cause directing the Sheriff of the County
[and his
deputy
dpty
]
to take the said plaintiff and hire her
himout during the pendency of this suit and also that he be
directed to take from the person so hiring a bond in sufficient penalty & with sufficient security to pay the hire of said slaves
& to abide the determination of this suit & to produce her
them according as the judgment of the Court may require.
Geo W. Goode
Attorney
Atty
for defendant
In the Circuit CourtCircuit Court
HarrietHarriet of color
versus
vs
.
IreneIrene Emmerson
Motion
filed March 14th 1848
John RulandJno. Ruland clerk