Defendant’s Bill of Exceptions [Dred Scott]

Item

“Defendant’s Bill of Exceptions [Dred Scott]”. Post-Verdict Briefing After Second Trial, 1850, St. Louis Circuit Court Historical Records Project, accessed October 3, 2026, https://digitalexhibits.library.washu.edu/s/ccr/item/108440

Full Text: See images and transcription side by side
Filing Name: Defendant’s Bill of Exceptions [Dred Scott]
Description: Defendant’s (Emerson) bill of exceptions (in Dred Scott case); allowed by Alexander Hamilton, filed February 13, 1850
Date: 1850-02-13
Is Part Of: Post-Verdict Briefing after Second Trial
Identifier: dre1850.0086.087
Case ID: ccr1850.0000.011
Source: Missouri State Archives - St. Louis
Rights: Public Domain
PDF Download: Download PDF of all images
Transcription: > Legal Function: bill of exceptions

---

**Item Page 1**

> Image file: ds64front.jpg
> Document: Defendant's (Emerson) bill of exceptions (in Dred Scott case)

State of Missouri St. Louis Circuit Court

County of St. Louis of the November Term A D 1849

Dred Scott ^ (a man of color) ^ ~~a slave~~

ads.[?] Bill of Exceptions

Irene Emerson

Be it remembered that on the trial of this Cause at the November Term of this Court AD 1849— That the entire evidence offered by the Plaintiff Dred Scott was contained in the following Depositions (here insert the Depositions of Mrs. Adaline Russell, Miles H Clark & Catharine A Anderson) & the testimony of Samuel Russell who testified that he hired the Plaintiff Scott of Mrs. Emerson ^ the widow of Dr. John Emerson who was a surgeon in the U.S. army at Rock Island and Fort Snelling ^
& paid the wages due, sometimes to her & sometimes to her agent, that such hiring was previous to the commencement of this suit & was in the City & County of St. Louis ^ she claimed the Pltff as her Slave ^
— That the Defendant Emerson offered no testimony illegible on said trial, but asked of the Court the following instructions (here set out instructions marked “A”) which the Court refused to give, to which refusal the Defendant, by Counsel, then & there excepted— That thereupon the Plaintiff Scott, by Counsel, asked the following instructions (here set out instructions marked “B”) which were given by the Court & to the giving of which the Defendant by her Counsel there & then Excepted — That under Said Depositions Testimony & Instructions the Jury on the trial aforesaid, “found ~~for the plaintiff”~~ ^ the following verdict. (here insert the verdict) ^
Whereupon Defendant filed by her Attorney at the Same Term & within four days after trial & verdict the following motion, with the accompanying reasons for a New trial ( here insert the motion etc. filed Jany 12th ’50) that said Motion afterwards coming on to be heard at Said Term in its regular place upon the Law Docket, after hearing was by the Court refused, to which refusal to grant a new trial, Defendant by Counsel then & there duly Excepted & now Excepts & to preserve the Evidence of all of which, the Counsel for the Defendant asks that this
her Bill of Exceptions may be signed & made part of the Record all which is done accordingly A. Hamilton Judge. illegible[?]

---

**Item Page 2**

> Image file: ds64back.jpg
> Legal Function: file record

St. Louis Circuit Court

Dred Scott

ags[?]

Irene Emerson

Bill of Exceptions

G & N

Dfts Attys

Filed Feb 13 1850

M. S. Cerrȳ clerk

Item sets: Dred Scott Collection; Post-Verdict Briefing after Second Trial