A larger version of this object is available to teachers and students for free. Others can subscribe for $25/year.
Larger images are also available to schools and libraries via subscription to American History, 1493-1943. Check to see if your school or library already has a subscription or click here for more information.
- GLC#
- GLC09087
- Type
- Books & pamphlets
- Date
- July 1859
- Author/Creator
- Taney, Roger Brooke, 1777-1864
- Title
- The Quarterly Law Journal, vol IV, No 3, [163] - 202.
- Place Written
- s.l.
- Pagination
- 39 p. :
- Primary time period
- National Expansion and Reform, 1815-1860
- Sub-Era
- Age of Jackson
Circuit court case of United States v. Amy, re: slave stealing letter written by her master. Arrested under Section 22 of the Act of Congress which provides that "Any person shall steal a letter from the mail, the offender shall, upon conviction, be imprisoned not less than two years..." The defense held that the word "person" as used in the Constitution of the United States to describe a citizen, did not apply to a slave, as defined in the Dred Scott Decision of 1857, and asked for a motion to dismiss. Although the judge hearing both cases was Roger B. Taney, chief justice of the Supreme Court (serving here as circuit court judge), he declined to uphold his own precedent.
Citation Guidelines for Online Resources
- Copyright Notice
- The copyright law of the United States (title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these specific conditions is that the photocopy or reproduction is not to be “used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research.” If a user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excess of “fair use,” that user may be liable for copyright infringement. This institution reserves the right to refuse to accept a copying order if, in its judgment, fulfillment of the order would involve violation of copyright law.