e already said in an earlier part of this opinion, upon
a different point, the right of property in a slave is distinctly and
expressly affirmed in the Constitution. The right to traffic in it,
like an ordinary article of merchandise and property, was guarantied
to the citizens of the United States, in every State that might desire
it, for twenty years. And the Government in express terms is pledged
to protect it in all future time, if the slave escapes from his
owner. This is done in plain words--too plain to be misunderstood. And
no word can be found in the Constitution which gives Congress a
greater power over slave property, or which entitles property of that
kind to less protection than property of any other description. The
only power conferred is the power coupled with the duty of guarding
and protecting the owner in his rights.

Upon these considerations, it is the opinion of the court that the act
of Congress which prohibited a citizen from holding and owning
property of this kind in the territory of the United States north of
the line therein mentioned, is not warranted by the Constitution, and
is therefore void; and that neither Dred Scott himself, nor any of his
family, were made free by being carried into this territory; even if
they had been carried there by the owner, with the intention of
becoming a permanent resident.

We have so far examined the case, as it stands under the Constitution
of the United States, and the powers thereby delegated to the Federal
Government.

But there is another point in the case which depends on State power
and State law. And it is contended, on the part of the plaintiff, that
he is made free by being taken to Rock Island, in the State of
Illinois, independently of his residence in the territory of the
United States; and being so made free, he was not again reduced to a
state of slavery by being brought back to Missouri.

Our notice of this part of the case will be very brief; for the
principle on which it depends was decided in this court, upon much
consideration, in the case of Strader et al. _v._ Graham, reported in
10th Howard, 82. In that case, the slaves had been taken from Kentucky
to Ohio, with the consent of the owner, and afterwards brought back to
Kentucky. And this court held that their _status_ or condition, as
free or slave, depended upon the laws of Kentucky, when they were
brought back into that State, and not of Ohio; and that this court had
no jurisdic