| Slavery and the Kansas-Nebraska Act (1820-1858) |
|
Sections:- The Missouri Compromise
- Sectionalism and the Missouri Compromise
- 19th Century Debate on Slavery
- The Kansas-Nebraska Act
- Newspaper Reaction to the Kansas-Nebraska Act
- Increasing Support for the Republican Party and the Assault on Charles Sumner
- Civil War in Kansas
- John Brown on "Bleeding Kansas"
- From the Lincoln-Douglas Debates
|
| Historical Context
The debate over the Kansas-Nebraska Act and the subsequent birth of the Republican Party can be traced back to the enactment of the Missouri Compromise of 1820. Attached Documents
The Missouri Compromise concerned the territory acquired from the Louisiana Purchase, which both expanded America's land holdings, while also posing a threat to the delicate balance achieved in Congress. The dilemma began with the application of Missouri as a slave-state. If admitted, Missouri would upset the even proportion of slave states and free states within the U.S. Senate.
The Missouri Compromise called for the admittance of Missouri as a slave state and Maine as a free state. The balance was maintained, yet the vast territories were suddenly a problem. The Missouri Compromise addressed such issues, prohibiting slavery above the 36 30 latitude line. The map provided below depicts the agreement. Slavery was prohibited in the Missouri Territory (Dark Green, the area north of the Arkansas Territory (light blue), with the exception of the state of Missouri (yellow).
Questions to Consider
1) Why was the balance in Congress obtained through the Missouri Compromise so important? |
| | | | Citations: | |
|
| Historical Context
Since the founding of the United States, the institution of slavery haunted American leaders and remained a blight on the national conscience until the Civil War.
Attached Documents
As indicated in the chart below, slavery increasingly became a southern institution by the time of the Missouri Compromise, an agreement that many believed would conclude divisions over slavery. Also included is Thomas Jefferson's famous letter regarding the Missouri Compromise in which he expresses his oft-repeated sentiment that slavery was a quagmire from which there was no real practicable escape. He lamented that the Missouri Compromise was but a temporary reprieve from the divisive issues of slavery.
Questions to Consider
1. Why does Jefferson balk at the notion of confining slavery to a particular region?
2. What political priority of Jefferson's conflicts with his distaste for the institution of slavery?
3. What is Jefferson alluding to in the last paragraph of the letter? |
| | | | Citations: | |
|
| Historical Context
Throughout the 19th century, debates raged over the role of slavery in American society. The two attachments include diametrically opposed views on the subject.
Attached Documents
The first, from Angelina Grimke's famous work on the evils of slavery, the ardent abolitionist and native of South Carolina makes a strong case for chattel slavery being antithetical to Christian values.
In contrast, John C. Calhoun, the staunch defender of states’ rights and, by association, the institution of slavery, even goes as far as to suggest that slavery has a positive influence in southern society in an address before the Senate.
Questions to Consider
1. Explain Grimke's metaphor of the "unwelcome light"? What does the light represent and who is it repugnant to?
2. During which religious movement was Grimke was writing about slavery? See the module entitled, "Revivalism and Reform in Antebellum America for clues.
3. What arguments does Calhoun employ to support his assertion that slavery is a "positive good"? |
| | | | | Citations: | |
|
| Historical Context
The slavery debate culminated with the proposal of the Kansas-Nebraska Act in late May of 1854, although slavery was not necessarily the only issue at hand. Proposed by Stephen Douglas, the Kansas-Nebraska Act centered on a notion proposed by Douglas, that of "Popular Sovereignty." The Kansas-Nebraska Act concerned the land which had previously been decided upon by the Missouri Compromise of 1820. The act succeeded in dividing the region (displayed as tan in the map below) into two territories, the Kansas Territory (south of the 40th parallel) and the Nebraska Territory (North of the 40th parallel). Slavery was to be decided on by the people of the Kansas Territory, hence the notion of popular sovereignty. Slavery was to be prohibited in the Nebraska Territory. Such an act clearly abolished the Missouri Compromise, which called for a complete prohibition of slavery north of the 36 30 latitude line.
Douglas' role in the passing of the Kansas-Nebraska Act can be seen as an example of his keen compromising skills. The Act was a result of a compromise with southern senators concerning the ever-growing railroad industry. Douglas, senator from Illinois, desired a railroad line to pass through Chicago on its journey to the Pacific Coast. Southern senators, on the other hand, wished the railroad line to begin in New Orleans and continue on to southern California. As a result, Douglas proposed the Kansas-Nebraska Act in exchange for the agreement of the southern Senators to a railroad through Chicago.
Questions to Consider
1) In what ways was the Kansas-Nebraska Act an example of "politics as usual"?
2) Consider the notion of popular sovereignty. Why did Stephen Douglas promote popular sovereignty in the Kansas territory? |
| | | Citations: | |
|
| Attached Documents
The documents below are excerpts from three editorials discussing the Kansas-Nebraska Act and the "popular sovereignty" aspect of the agreement.
The first editorial advocated the necessity of preventing slavery’s further northern march while the remaining two pieces espoused the spirit of popular sovereignty as the appropriate measure for determining whether a state was to be slave or free.
Questions to Consider
1. List some examples modern political disputes that pit the notion of popular sovereignty and states' rights against the notion of a broad national interest. |
| | | | | Citations: | |
|
| Attached Documents
On May 19 and 20 of 1856, Charles Sumner, Senator from Massachusetts and fierce critic of the Kansas-Nebraska Act addressed the Senate with his speech entitled "The Crime Against Kansas". A brilliant writer and orator, Sumner's speech specifically attacked Stephen Douglas and Senator Andrew Butler of South Carolina. Using graphic language, Sumner's argument was harsh and uncompromising. Provided below is the text of the address.
Sumner's address was not received well by southerners. On May 22, Preston Brooks, cousin of Butler and Congressman from South Carolina entered the Senate chambers, outraged by Sumner's words. Brooks proceeded to violently attack Sumner, beating him mercilessly with a cane. When the attack finally ended, Sumner was badly injured.
The assault sent shockwaves throughout the country. Outraged by the attack, Republicans solidified their base by rehashing the details of the attack exhaustively in newspapers. Increased support for the party was a direct result of the attack of Charles Sumner. Americans were shocked by the event and many found it inappropriate for members of government to act in such ways. The following newspaper article describes the attack and display the attempt of the writers to unite Republicans and would-be Republicans to their side.
Questions to Consider
1. Consider the partisan divisions at work within Sumner's address to the Senate.
|
| | | | | | Citations: | |
|
| Historical Context
The Kansas-Nebraska Act resulted in the emigration of many Americans to the region in order to affect the vote concerning the legality of slavery in Kansas. The pro-slavery and anti-slavery groups violently clashed between the time the act was passed and 1858. Called "border ruffians" by their Northern counterparts, southern pro-slavery factions, largely from Missouri, fought heavily with northern abolitionists, particularly those associated with the New England Emigrant Aid Company.
Attached Documents
The following documents describe the bloody events which led to the coining of the phrase "Bleeding Kansas" to describe the civil war erupting in the new territory. Of major concern was the electing of the territorial legislation in the Kansas territory. Convinced the elections were fraudulent and illegal, Charles Robinson, governor and free-Soiler, wrote a letter to Eli Thayer of the New England Emigrant Aid Company describing the voting irregularities, which is provided below.
The second document is a letter from a settler in Kansas. Her letter to a family member describes the constant fear experienced by her family of the border ruffians.
In order to address the Kansas issue, a Congressional committee, dubbed the Howard Committee was established in 1856. The Committee released a scathing description of the infamous "border ruffians", which is provided below.
R.H. Wilson, a self-proclaimed "border ruffian" published a biography in which he discusses in detail the sack of Lawrence which immediately followed the attack of Charles Sumner. The sack, which resulted in the surrender of the anti-slavery faction in Lawrence, resulted in the burning of the city, as is depicted in the picture below. Of special note within Wilson's account is the mention of Davy Atchison, the U.S. Senator from Missouri. Such a mention of Atchison's involvement in the civil war in Kansas displays the rather "wild west" atmosphere of the time; Atchison, considered to be a distinguished Senator, was also the commander of the unit which attacked Lawrence.
Questions to Consider
1) Discuss the emigration of voters to the Kansas area. Was this what Douglas had in mind by "popular sovereignty"?
|
| | | | | | | Citations: | |
|
| Historical Context
John Brown traveled to several Northeastern cities in the spring of 1857 to solicit financial support for his abolitionist crusade in Kansas.
Attached Documents
In a speech delivered from handwritten notes, Brown outlined the overwhelming sacrifices and horrific conditions endured in his battle for the heart of Kansas. From the loss of his own sons to the visions of burned homes and the massive destruction of property, from the fear that produced flight to the tragedies and cruelties of slavery’s resistance, the essence of “Bleeding Kansas” was brought to life in John Brown’s words.
Questions to Consider
1. Why was Kansas experiencing civi strife at this time? Who were the parties involved?
2. Why were people traveling to Kansas to vote?
3. List the consquences of the conflict in Kansas as described by Brown. |
| | | | Citations: | |
|
| Historical Context
In the immediate aftermath of the Kansas-Nebraska Act the divisive nature of the slavery issue paved the way for the outbreak of the Civil War. In a hotly contested race for a Senate seat in Illinois in 1858, Stephen Douglas and Abraham Lincoln engaged in a series of debates that transcended state politics and focused largely on slavery.
Attached Documents
In the attached excerpts, Douglas proclaims that the Founding Fathers did not intend to grant African-Americans equality while Lincoln illustrates that such an assertion is illogical and inconsistent with America’s founding principles.
Questions to Consider
1. Summarize the arguments of each debator.
2. Douglas argues that the actions of Founding Fathers relating to slavery demonstrate their advocacy of the institution and their belief in white supremacy. What do you think? Discuss the extent to which you think that interpretations of the founding documents should take the framers' intent and/or example into account?
3. How does Lincoln counter Douglas' argument? Do you think he effectively answered it? |
| | | Citations: | |
|
| Back To Module List Back to Sections |
