Editing Fort Snelling (section)

===Slavery at the fort===
When Fort Snelling was built in 1820, fur traders and officers at the post, including Colonel Snelling, employed slave labor for cooking, cleaning, and other domestic chores. Although slavery was a violation of both the [[Northwest Ordinance|Northwest Ordinance of 1787]] and the [[Missouri Compromise|Missouri Compromise of 1820]], an estimated 15–30 Africans were enslaved at the fort.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web|title=Dred and Harriet Scott in Minnesota {{!}} MNopedia|url=https://www.mnopedia.org/event/dred-and-harriet-scott-minnesota|access-date=2020-06-19|website=www.mnopedia.org}}</ref> US Army officers submitted pay vouchers to cover the expenses of retaining enslaved persons. From 1855 to 1857, nine individuals were enslaved at Fort Snelling. The last slave-holding unit was the 10th Infantry. Slavery was made unconstitutional in Minnesota when the state constitution was ratified in 1858.<ref name=":1">{{Cite web|title=Enslaved African Americans and the Fight for Freedom|url=https://www.mnhs.org/fortsnelling/learn/african-americans|access-date=2020-06-19|website=Minnesota Historical Society|language=en}}</ref>
[[File:Dred & Harriet Scott Quarters.jpg|alt=Restored quarters believed to have been occupied by Dred & Harriet Scott 1836–1840 at Fort Snelling|thumb|Restored quarters believed to have been occupied by [[Dred Scott|Dred]] & [[Harriet Robinson Scott|Harriet Scott]] 1836–1840 at Fort Snelling]]
Two women that had lived enslaved at Fort Snelling sued for their freedom and were set free in 1836. One, named Rachel, was enslaved Lieutenant Thomas Stockton at Fort Snelling from 1830 to 1831, then at [[Fort Crawford]] at Prairie du Chien until 1834. When Rachel and her son were sold in St. Louis, she sued, claiming that she had been illegally enslaved in the [[Minnesota Territory]]. In 1836 the Missouri Supreme Court ruled in her favor making her a free person.<ref name=":1" /> The second woman, Courtney, also sued for freedom in St. Louis. When the Missouri Supreme Court ruled in Rachel's favor, Courtney's enslaver conceded her case as well, and freed Courtney and her son William.<ref name=":1" /><ref>{{Cite news|last=Woltman|first=Nick|date=May 4, 2019|title=Dred Scott is Fort Snelling's best-known slave, but there were many others|work=Twin Cities Pioneer Press|url=https://www.twincities.com/2019/05/04/fort-snelling-slaves-dred-scott-and-wife-sued-for-freedom-and-became-famous-for-it/|access-date=2022-01-14}}</ref> Courtney had another son named [[Joseph Godfrey|Godfrey]] that remained in Minnesota when she was sent to a [[slave market]] in St. Louis.<ref name="Courtney" /> He is the only known "Minnesota [[Fugitive slaves in the United States|runaway slave]]" that ran away from the fort and was taken in by the Dakota.<ref name="Courtney">Slavery and Freedom on the Minnesota Territory Frontier: The Strange Saga of Joseph Godfrey, Black Past web site, Walt Bachman, August 2013 [https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/slavery-and-freedom-minnesota-territory-frontier-strange-saga-joseph-godfrey/]</ref> He was involved in the Dakota War and was the first defendant on the docket of the military tribunal for hanging.<ref name="Courtney" />

The fort surgeon, Dr. John Emerson, purchased Dred Scott at a slave market in [[St. Louis|Saint Louis]], Missouri, where slavery was legal. Emerson was posted to Fort Snelling during the 1830s and brought Scott north with him.<ref name=":0" /> There Scott meet and married Harriet and had two children as slaves at Fort Snelling from 1836 to 1840. Dr. Emerson's wife Irene, returned to St. Louis taking the Scotts and their children in 1840. In 1843 Scott sued for his family's freedom for illegally being indentured in free territory. Although he lost that first trial, he appealed and in 1850 his family was given their freedom. In 1852, Emerson appealed and the Scotts were again enslaved. Dred Scott appealed that decision and in 1857 the US Supreme Court decided that the Scotts would stay enslaved. ''[[Dred Scott v. Sandford]]'' was a landmark case that held that neither enslaved nor free Africans were meant to hold the privileges or constitutional rights of United States citizens. This case garnered national attention and pushed political tensions towards the Civil War.<ref name=":1" /><ref name=":0" />

A longstanding precedent in [[freedom suits]] of "once free, always free" was overturned in this case. (The cases were combined under Dred Scott's name.) It was appealed to the United States Supreme Court. In ''Dred Scott v. Sandford'' (1857), Chief Justice Taney ruled that the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional and that enslaved Africans had no standing under the constitution, so could not sue for freedom. The decision increased sectional tensions between the North and South.