Cody Wandersee. Prof. Angela Rush. Intro To Constitutional

James Marvin Ellis, born June 30, 1842, sparked the foundation of Ellsworth. Although Ellis did not receive a sufficient education as a child, at the age of thirty-two he both cultivated one hundred sixty acres of farmland and managed a general store. (History 759) Not only did Ellis publicly exert himself, but his private life prospered as well. Ellis and his wife, Mary A. Beaty, brought forth seven children to the local population: Marvin U., Hester J., Elliot E., Thomas G., Joseph A., and Lotta A. (Ellis 1). In addition to agriculture, family, and merchandising, he also served as the town’s original postmaster (History 760). This holds importance because a post office provided a town’s first official identification (Kreitzer 65). Ellis’ societal involvement ventured much further than the town of Ellsworth, though.

The Court ruled in favor of the appellant, and the decision is described as follows:

What did the appellate court rule? Did it agree with the trial court (affirm) or disagree (reverse)?

For summary judgment to be granted, the movant must show “that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). The appellate standard of review for reviewing summary judgment orders in this case is the de novo standard, as this is a decision regarding “mixed questions of law and fact”. Barr v. Lafon, 538 F.3d 554, 562 (6th Cir. 2008).

1867. She married fellow new burns wicker Linus Seelye and had three sons they lived

Phillis Wheatley was only seven or eight years old when he was captured and taken from her home in West Africa. She was put on a slave ship and taken to Boston in 1761. A man who went by the name John Wheatley, who knew nothing of her future talents, purchased the young girl directly from the ship. The first thing John did was gave her was a name, it was Phillis Wheatley. Phillis was made a slave and did work around the house, like cooking and cleaning.

Dr. Albert Priddy was the superintendent of the State Colony for Epileptics and Feeble-Minded at Lynchburg he supported the population through the eugenics

Rachel vs. Walker Case which states that if a slave returns to Missouri and is not owned as Dred Scott did there

Emerson treated the entire family as his salves (http://www.pbs.org/wnet/supremecourt/antebellum/landmark_dred.html). Just before the suit was filed, Dr. Emerson sold Dred Scott, Harriet, and their two children to John F. A. Sandford. Sandford, considering the Scott family his slaves, "laid hands on them and imprisoned them" many times (http://www.pbs.org/wnet/supremecourt/antebellum/landmark_dred.html). These actions would be considered legal if Harriet, Lizzie, Eliza, and Dred Scott were his slaves. Dred Scott wanted to challenge this. Due to the Missouri Compromise, Illinois and the territory where Dr. Emerson had taken Dred Scott and purchased Harriet, were free (Independence Hall Association 2013). Dred Scott sued his owner, John Sandford, for assaulting himself, and his family. Scott openly admitted he was born a slave and of African descent, but he also argued that once his owner took him and his family to a free state and territory to exist in, his family became free from slavery. And since they were free when Sandford moved them back to Missouri, Scott claimed it was illegal for Sandford to assault him and his family. Scott also claimed he should be legally considered a citizen by the state. These are the ideas on which Scott pursued to sue Sandford. His declaration specifically had three counts: that Sandford assaulted Dred Scott that Sandford had assaulted Harriet,

Perhaps one of the most well documented cases of slave breeding comes from the plantation being tended by Robert W. Campbell. Mr. Campbell was the brother-in-law of President James K. Polk. In one letter, Mr. Campbell promises to buy him young female slaves for the purpose of forced mating, because President Polk had a great proportion of young male slaves on his “farm.” So, the forced breeding of slaves ran through even the highest-ranking office in the country, that of the

was still not free after Emerson died in 1843 leaving the Scott family to his wife Scott tried to buy his freedom but was still

Marion’s husband, Anton Arnold Pritchard, was a U.S. soldier who transferred to U.N.R.R.A. Marion married Anton on April 18, 1947. Shortly after marrying, she and her husband made the voyage to America where they planned to start a family. Marion worked for a short time before having children (Oral History Interview).

In 1846, a slave living in Missouri named Dred Scott, sued for his freedom on the basis that he had lived for a total of seven years in territories that were closed to slavery. Scott's owner had been an army doctor named John Emerson. Emerson's position had required him to move several times in a relatively short amount of time. During his time with Emerson, Scott had lived in the state of Illinois, which was

A few specific slave women were brought

He went back to the university in 1880 and acquired his Bachelor of Medicine and his Master of Surgery degree. Then he went on the Mayumba, serving as ship’s surgeon again, for his first gainful employment. It navigated between Liverpool and the West Coast of Africa. He found Africa “detestable” and quite as soon as they were back in England. Facing the prospect of having to file for bankruptcy, he moved to Portsmouth to open his first practice. He struggled with trying to be a good doctor and become a recognized author. This earned him a fairly decent salary.