“… And now as to the Dred Scott decision.  That decision declares two propositions – first, that a Negro cannot sue in the U.S. Courts; and secondly, that Congress cannot prohibit slavery in the Territories.  … Chief Justice Taney, in delivering the opinion of the majority of the Court, insists … that Negroes were no part of the people who made, or for whom was made, the Declaration of Independence, or the Constitution of the United States.  On the contrary, Judge Curtis, in his dissenting opinion, shows that in five of the then thirteen states … free Negroes were voters, and, in proportion to their numbers, had the same part in making the Constitution that the white people had.  … I think the authors of … [the Declaration of Independence] intended to include ‘all’ men … They defined with tolerable distinctness, in what respects they did consider all men created equal – equal in ‘certain inalienable rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.’  This they said, and this meant.  … They meant simply to declare the ‘right,’ so that the ‘enforcement’ of it might follow … They meant to set up a standard maxim for free society, which should be familiar to all, and revered by all; constantly looked to, constantly labored for, and even though never perfectly attained, constantly approximated, and thereby constantly spreading and deepening its influence, and augmenting the happiness and value of life to all people of all colors everywhere.  … Its authors meant it to be … a stumbling block to those who in after times might seek to turn a free people back into the hateful paths of despotism.  They knew the proneness of prosperity to breed tyrants, and they meant when such should re-appear in this fair land and commence their vocation they should find left for them at least one hard nut to crack.  …”

Abraham Lincoln