Plaintiff’s [Dred Scott] Affidavit in Support of Motion for a New Trial

Item

“Plaintiff’s [Dred Scott] Affidavit in Support of Motion for a New Trial”. Post-Verdict Briefing After First Trial, 1847, St. Louis Circuit Court Historical Records Project, accessed October 6, 2026, https://digitalexhibits.library.washu.edu/s/ccr/item/108485

Full Text: See images and transcription side by side
Filing Name: Plaintiff’s [Dred Scott] Affidavit in Support of Motion for a New Trial
Description: Dred Scott's affidavit in support of a new trial explaining surprise Russell testimony
Date: 1847-07-24
Is Part Of: Post-Verdict Briefing after First Trial
Identifier: dre1847.0033.033
Case ID: ccr1847.0000.034
Source: Missouri State Archives - St. Louis
Rights: Public Domain
PDF Download: Download PDF of all images
Transcription: > Legal Function: affidavit

Dred Scott
vs.
Irene Emerson

Dred Scott, the plaintiff in this Cause in Support of his motion for a new trial ~~[,]~~ States upon oath.
That he was Surprised in the testimony of the witness Samuel Russell, by whom he expected to move that he, this affiant, was hired as a Salon by Said Russell from the defendant, previous to the Commencement of this Suit, & that Said Russell Paid to Said defendant money for the hire of this affiant as a ^ X ^ Slave, and that he did not know previous to, or as ~~[illegible]~~ the trial of Said Cause that he could ^ prove ^ X ^ Said facts, or Could prove that he was claimed as a Slave or held in Slavery by Said defendant, by any other person than Said Russell, and therefore relied solely upon the testimony of Said Russell to prove Such facts as now necessary to maintain Said Suit of which Said defendant, is the person holding this affiant in Slavery.
^ X ^ This affiant in support of this affidavit makes an exhibit of a certain letter addressed to Said Russell by J.R. Lackland one of the Counsel of this affiant & the answer of Said Russell to the Said letter —from which it will appear, that previous to Said trial Said Russell informed Said Lackland that he Said Russell hired this affiant in March 1846.

---

**Item Page 2**

> Image file: ds25back.jpg
> Document: Plaintiff's (Dred Scott) Affidavit in Support of Motion for a New Trial

from the defendant & that he Said Russell Paid the Said hire of this affiant to Said defendant.

This affiant further states that relying solely upon the testimony of Said Russell to prove these facts & knowing no other person by whom he could prove the same facts, or other facts tending to the Same ends[?], he went into trial. When to his Surprise Said Russell testifyed in effect that he did not hire this affiant from ^ X ^ Said defendant, nor did he pay Said hire to Said defendant, for that his Knowledge of such facts was solely derived from the information of his Wife.
This affiant thus taken by surprise in the testimony of Said Russell[,] was unable to establish Said facts to the Satisfaction of the Jury, for which reason, he supposes, a verdict was rendered against him.

This affiant states that previous to said trial he had no knowledge that the Wife of Said Russell had any knowledge that this affiant was held in Slavery by Said defendant but that if a new trial is granted to him he expects to prove by the testimony of the Wife of Said Russell that Said defendant, previous to the Commencement of Said Suit hired this affiant to the Wife of Said Russell,

---

**Item Page 3**

> Image file: ds26front.jpg

acting as the agent of her Said husband, and that her acts in this ocassion were ratifyed & approved by her Said husband & that Said defendant Claimed this affiant as her Slave.

This affiant avers that previous to Said trial he had no knowledge that the Wife of Said Russell, or any other person ^ than Said Russell ^ had any knowledge that this affiant was held in Slavery by Said defendant.

This affiant avers that the facts illegible[?] in his petition to sue for his freedom are true. That he was & is a free man & was at the time of the Commencement of this Suit held in Slavery by Said defendant .[?] That the verdict against this affiant is unjust & oppressive tending to the ...[?]tion of rights to which he is entitled by the laws of the land. And that upon a new ^ X ^ trial he will be able to establish his right to freedom & to prove that he was & is unjustly & unlawfully held in Slavery by Said defendant.

his

Dred X Scott

mark

> Legal Function: notarization

Subscribed & sworn this

24th July 1847. Jno. Ruland clerk

> Legal Function: file record

---

**Item Page 4**

> Image file: ds26back.jpg

X

Dred Scott

vs.

Irene Emerson

Affidavit of Dred Scott

an application for a new trial

Filed July 24th 1847

Jno. Ruland clerk

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