Free native-born men descended from African slaves were citizens of five States at the Articles' ratification; those otherwise qualified could vote. When fixed rules of interpretation are abandoned, and individuals' opinions control its meaning, we have no longer a Constitution.
Next post: Albany Evening Journal, Mar 7, 1857 →
The post above is condensed. From the original, word for word
"At the time of the ratification of the Articles of Confederation, all free native-born inhabitants of the States of New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, and North Carolina, though descended from African slaves, were not only citizens of those States, but such of them as had the other necessary qualifications possessed the franchise of electors, on equal terms with other citizens. [...] when a strict interpretation of the Constitution, according to the fixed rules which govern the interpretation of laws, is abandoned, and the theoretical opinions of individuals are allowed to control its meaning, we have no longer a Constitution; we are under the government of individual men"
Curtis answers Taney with the record: Black men voted in five of the ratifying states, which is difficult to square with a claim that they were never meant to be citizens. He resigned from the Court within months — the only justice in its history to leave over a decision. The two fragments are from different parts of the dissent, joined with [...].
Read it in the original — Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857), Curtis dissenting ↗