(MUSIC)

VOICE ONE:

THE MAKING OF A NATION -- a program in Special English.

(MUSIC)

As we reported in our last program, the national election ofeighteen fifty-six put a new man into the White House: JamesBuchanan of Pennsylvania. He defeated John Fremont, the candidate ofthe new Republican Party, which was opposed to slavery.

Most of the new president's closest friends were southerners.Buchanan had often supported the south in the dispute over slavery.He wrote that the north was too aggressive toward the south andshould stop interfering with slavery in the slave states.

Buchanan said that the south had good reason to leave the Unionif Abolitionists kept up their attacks against slavery.

VOICE TWO:

As the new president, Buchananbelieved he could solve the slave question by keeping theAbolitionists quiet. Success would mean the end of the anti-slaveryRepublican Party.

In choosing his cabinet, Buchanan wanted men who shared the sameideas and interests. President Pierce had tried to unite thedifferent groups in the party by giving each a representative in hiscabinet. This had not worked. It had driven the different partygroups farther apart.

Buchanan had served in President Polk's cabinet. He rememberedhow well its members worked together. He said it was the unity ofthis cabinet that made Polk's administration so successful.

VOICE ONE:

Buchanan gave the job of Secretary of State to Lewis Cass ofMichigan. Cass was seventy-five years old. His mind had lost itssharpness. This did not worry Buchanan, because he had planned to behis own foreign minister.

The job of Treasury Secretary went to Howell Cobb, a southernmoderate from Georgia. Southerners also were named as Secretary ofWar, Interior Secretary, and Postmaster General.

Isaac Toucey of Connecticut was given the job of Navy Secretary.Toucey was a northerner. But he supported many policies of thesouth. Another northerner -- Jeremiah Black of Pennsylvania --became Attorney General.

In forming his cabinet, Buchanan did not ask for advice fromSenator Stephen Douglas of Illinois. Douglas was the party's leaderin the Senate and the most powerful Democrat in the northwest.

Douglas believed that the northwest should have tworepresentatives in the cabinet. He said Cass could be one of them.But Douglas wanted one of his own supporters to be the other.Buchanan refused what Douglas wanted. And he gave theadministration's support to a political enemy of Douglas.

VOICE TWO:

James Buchanan was sworn-in as president on March fourth,eighteen fifty-seven. In his inaugural speech, the new presidentdenounced the long dispute over slavery. He said he hoped it wouldend soon.

Buchanan said the dispute could be settled easily by doing twothings: by ending interference with slavery in states where it waslegal. And by letting the people of a territory decide if theywanted slavery.

Buchanan said he expected the Supreme Court to rule soon on theright of the people of a territory to decide this. He said he wassure that all good citizens -- north and south -- would accept thehigh court's ruling.

VOICE ONE:

At the time he said this, Buchanan already knew what the court'sdecision would be. He had even used his influence to help one memberof the court to decide. The decision was made in the case of DredScott, a negro slave.

Scott was sold in Missouri to an army doctor who took him toIllinois and then went into the Wisconsin territory. Scott lived inthese two places for almost four years before he was returned toMissouri.

Scott asked a court in Missouri to give him his freedom. Heclaimed that living in Illinois and Wisconsin -- where slavery wasillegal -- had made him a free man.

VOICE TWO:

The court agreed with Scott and gave him his freedom. But thedecision was appealed, and the Supreme Court of Missouri ruledagainst him. Scott then took his case to a federal court. Finally,he asked the United States Supreme Court to decide if he was a slaveor a free man.

The Supreme Court took up the case in December,eighteen-fifty-six. The judges studied it carefully because itraised serious constitutional questions.

Scott claimed he was free because he had lived in free territory.It was free because Congress -- in the Missouri compromise ofeighteen twenty made slavery illegal in that area. Scott's ownerraised the questions: Did Congress have the Constitutional power toclose a territory to slavery? Was the Missouri Compromise legal?

VOICE ONE:

At first, most of the nine Supreme Court judges had planned togive a decision without answering this question. They did not wantto involve the court in this bitter dispute. The majority decidedthat a negro was not a citizen. Therefore, they said, Dred Scott hadno right to ask the court to hear his case.

In this way, the case could be settled without deciding on thepower of Congress to act on slavery in the territories.

But two of the nine Supreme Court judges opposed this ruling.Both were from the north. They had said they would write a minoritydecision. They said their decision would include a statement thatCongress did have power over slavery in the territories.

VOICE TWO:

Since two members of the court had planned to offer views on thisquestion, the other seven decided the majority also should do so.

Of the seven, five were from the south. They did not believeCongress had any power over territorial slavery. The remaining twojudges -- both from the north -- did not want to make what they feltwould be a political decision.

One southern member of the Supreme Court was James Catron, a goodfriend of James Buchanan. Buchanan had written to him asking whenthe court would act on the Dred Scott case.

VOICE ONE:

Catron had answered that the court would rule soon. Then he askedfor Buchanan's help in getting one of the northern members of thecourt to vote with the five from the south. He told the presidentthat the country would more easily accept the court's ruling if oneof the northern judges gave his support. Catron proposed thatBuchanan write to Justice Robert Grier of Pennsylvania.

So Buchanan wrote to Grier. He told him that a strong decision inthe Dred Scott case might do much to bring peace to the country.Grier agreed. He said he would vote with the five southerners. Theywould rule that the Constitution did not give Congress power overslavery in the territories.

All this had happened in the few weeks before Buchanan becamepresident.

VOICE TWO:

The Supreme Court finally announced its decision just two daysafter Buchanan moved into the White House. Chief Justice Roger Taneyread the decision in the small courtroom in the Capitol building.

The room was crowded with congressmen, senators, governmentofficials, and newspapermen. Chief Justice Taney began reading thedecision at eleven o'clock. He read for more than two and a halfhours.

He said the high court rejected Scott's claim of freedom forthree reasons. First, Scott was not a citizen. Taney said theConstitution gave the right of citizenship only to members of thewhite race. Because he was not a citizen, he had no right to ask thecourt to hear his case.

Secondly, Taney said Scott was ruled by the laws of Missouri, thestate in which he lived. Missouri laws did not give freedom toslaves who lived temporarily in free territory. Therefore, saidTaney, Scott was still a slave.

VOICE ONE:

Then the Chief Justice took up the question of the free territoryin which Scott had lived. It had become free territory under theMissouri Compromise. This was the law that Congress passed ineighteen twenty. This law kept slavery out of the northern part ofthe territory which the United States bought from France.

Justice Taney said Congress did not have the constitutional powerto pass such a law. He said when new territory was won, it belongedto all citizens. He said Congress had the right to govern suchterritory until it became a state. But he said Congress did not havepower to close new territory to any American citizen. He said thecitizen from Georgia had as much right to settle in this territorywith his slaves as a citizen of Maine with his horse.

Taney said there was no word in the Constitution that gaveCongress greater power over slave property than over any other kindof property. The only such power Congress held was the power toguard and protect the rights of the property owner.

To close territory to slaves, Taney said, violated theconstitutional rights of slaveholding citizens. Therefore, theMissouri Compromise was unconstitutional. Congress did not havepower to act on slavery in the territories.

The Supreme Court's decision was cheered by the south. But in thenorth, it raised a great fury.

(MUSIC)

VOICE TWO:

You have been listening to the Special English program, THEMAKING OF A NATION. Your narrators were Stan Busby and Jack Moyles.Our program was written by Frank Beardsley. THE MAKING OF A NATIONcan be heard Thursdays.