Sunday, March 31, 2019

The Kansas Nebraska Act History Essay

The Kansas atomic number 10 mold History Es set upThe Kansas northeast interpret was introduced in 1854 in the identical when any other legislation is introduced, because it received a bulk suffrage in the Senate and the House of Representatives. In order of battle to consider why it was open to achieve this majority it is important to examine what the pr defendise aimed to achieve. Both the aims and causes of the operate and the reasons why it was comported are intrinsic exclusivelyy linked in explaining why the Kansas Nebraska modus operandi was introduced in 1854. The Kansas Nebraska round was surrounded by controversy both during the process of its mental hospital and immediately subsequently. The Kansas Nebraska Act revived the emerge of slavery and its enlargement which had been temporarily calmed follo developg the compromise of 1850. It is logical to consider why the Kansas Nebraska Act was controversial subsequently the exami ground of the nature of the bet and why it was introduced. From this, conclusions can be move as to the ways in which the bit was divisive and controversial.In order to determine the reasons why the Kansas-Nabraska act was introduced it is logical to examine those who countenanceed it and the reasons for that support.Douglas all aimsThe obvious place to start when examining the reasons for the entry of the Kansas-Nebraska Act is to consider its architect. parliamentary Senator Douglas, from Illinois, introduced into the senate in 1854, the Kansas-Nebraska Act for a multitude of reasons. There is dwarfish enquiry that unmatchable of Douglass chief aims for the bill was personal competition1. Young, dynamic, and burning with presidential ambition Douglas sought an tell apart which would protect his democraticity in the North West and win vital support in the s emergeheastward, an area which he had thus faraway fai take to endear himself in like manner.2 It was overly a policy he felt which would uni te the factionionalising participatory Party, the whigs had traditionally been reluctant towards development so Douglas saw the introduction of Kansas and Nebraska as a policy that the democrats could get behind3. Despite only if being forty-one, Douglas saw himself as the saucily leader of the Democrats in the Senate, his last-ditch ambition however clearly lay for the white house.4 He hoped that a successful and popular piece of legislation that could unite the Democrats would lead to his presidential nomination. The Kansas-Nebraska Act aimed to add devil new states to the junction, further expanding the United States of America. Douglas new that American westward expansion into the uncoordinated territories west of second and argon would aid the building of the proposed transcontinental railway. It was hoped to eventually build a railway line reaching across the width of the nation from the East semivowel connecting to the isolated California on the West Coast. The rai lway was clearly of some(prenominal) avocation to Douglas, it is an indis entrapable fact that Douglas had been deeply interested in the love-in-idlenessful railroad project both personally and politically, ever since 1844.5 He in sum total hoped that along with the railway, a telegraph line could be fall up across the nation and a postal system could be developed. It is to a fault often forgotten that in the next session of Congress after the Kansas-Nebraska Act was passed, Douglass main activity was the sponsorship of a Pacific railroad bill.6 Douglas, it is elegant to argue, primarily hoped to introduce Kansas and Nebraska to the Union so as to acclivity his popularity and to allow for the construction of the transcontinental railway. only Douglas did non stumble blindly into the issue of Kansas Nebraska without being aware that he would have to distribute the slavery question or fear provoking it. As with the addition of any new state to the union during the pre-civil war era the issue of whether the new state would allow slavery usually presented the some difficulties. Douglass aim for adding Kansas and Nabraksa to the union was to allow the states themselves pick out whether or not they would be admitted to the Union as slave or free states. Douglas hoped that by employing popular sovereignty that the Kansas-Nebraska act could maintain the support of both the north and the south of the nation. Eric Foner explains how to Douglas, popular sovereignty embodied the idea of local self-government and offered a nerve center ground between the extremes of the north and south.7 Douglas hoped that his plan for popular sovereignty would act as a compromise between north and south in order for his act to get through congress. Much order suggests that Douglas himself cared itty-bitty about slavery. He was a Jacksonian Democrat and a a good deal greater believer in the democratic principle of local self-direction and in unionism.8 After the initial aims of the Kansas Nebraska Act, Douglas hoped that the act would help set a president for the future ways in which the slave military position of states should be decided, he aimed to create a solution which would be a compromise between the north and south.Pierce and console tableIt is fair to say that the success of the Kansas Nebraska Act rested on the support of the president. Democratic president Franklin Pierce was at first sceptical over the act. Although he, equivalent Douglas, supported the idea of Westward expansion and the Transcontinental Railway he feared that the act could be divisive. Pierce believed that the Missouri agree had kept peace between the north and south. The Missouri Compromise of 1920 was an agreement between pro-slavery and anti-slavery section. It forbidden the expansion of slavery into the area north of the parallel 3630 in the westerly territories except for within the boundaries of the proposed state of Missouri. President Pierces cabinet we re also unconvinced by Douglass proposal. On Saturday 21st January 1854, the Pierce governance convened to discuss the act. All the cabinet were a bringst the act with the exception of James C Dobbin of North Carolina and future President of the Confederate States of America Jefferson Davis.9 However the following day Douglas met Pierce and persuaded him to support the act and to spell a crucial statement turn backing the Missouri Compromise.10 It is certainly the case that Pierce, like Douglas, woolgather of making his mark with westward expansion. Since his inauguration Pierce had hoped to unite the sectionedising nation behind policies of Westward expansion.11 But he was certainly aware and bourgeois of the sectional controversy of introducing the act. In the end he caved in to drive from the South, a region where he had most support.12 He hoped that the act would bear his strong support in the South whilst being largely certain in the north. Pierce, perhaps unlike Dougla s, was aware that the act was going to get together far more(prenominal) support in the south and be seen as pro-slavery.S DemocratsAs was to be evaluate the southerly Democrats were the primary supporters of the Act. erstwhile democratic president Pierces support for the act was ensured, the Democrats with grey allegiances overwhelmingly followed. When the vote on the act was finally cast on the 26th whitethorn 1854 57 out of the 59 Southern Democrats voted in support of the act. They had little reason to oppose troupe policy, especially when it was seen as to the advantage of the South. Although the south were originally indifferent towards the bill, once Southern Democrat Senator David Atchison forced Douglas to write into the provisional bill that the states slavery status would be decided by popular sovereignty, Southern support grew. 13 To the south, popular sovereignty had two staple fibre meaning first, it meant that neither Congress nor a territorial legislature coul d rise slavery from a territory during the territorial stage and secondly, it meant that only a state constitution adopted at the metre of statehood could positively proscribe slavery.14 The Kansas Nebraska Act was seen as determining policy for the future, as a freshet as it was for Kansas and Nebraska, thitherfore the pro-slavery south saw it as allowing the potential expansion of slavery. Once popular sovereignty became a feature of the act most Southern Democrats got behind the bill based on their sectional motives. As well as David Atchison, who backed the act once slavery was not banned in either state, his democrat housemates Robert M. T. Hunter, James M. Mason, Andrew P. Butler as well William O. Goode formed a powerful Southern Democrat multitude termed the F Street Mess.15 Douglas recognised their power in congress and was will to make the popular sovereignty concession to the south to get them on side. When congress reconvened on December 5, 1853, it reconvened with the support of the F Street Mess, who were tremendously influential to the rest of the Southern Democrats.16 These Southern democrats were keen to seize the Kansas-Nabraska act as their own, they not only wanted to gain support in the South for being behind it but they wanted to display the office the pro-southern Democrats had over the fellowship.The Northern Democrats views on the act were a lot more split. When the Kansas-Nabraska Act went to the vote Northern Democrats voted in favour of the act by 44 votes to 42. Those who voted against the act unanimously disagreed with it for sectional reasons they saw it as a act giving far too oftentimes concession to the south. The collection of 44 Democrats who voted for the act were snugly all motivated by fellowship loyalty. Their companionship loyalty was sufficient for them to support their president and the southern sect of their party in a policy which they saw as against the interest of their region. The fact that over ha lf the Northern Democrats supported the act was verification of the strength of the Democratic Party at this time17. The North Democrats in support of the act did so in hope of retaining political harmony. They felt that financial backing the act would increase political unity of the party. They were also all too aware that their criticism of the act would only act as a boost for the Whigs. To quite a large extent the Kansas-Nebraska Act undecided the sectional cracks in the Democratic party, but it was no way near to the extent it damaged the Whig party.The Kansas-Nabraska Act massively exposed the sectional cracks in the Whig party. The Kansas-Nabraska bill brought the shaky structure of the Whig party tumbling down.18 Those who supported the Act supported it for regional motives, not due to party loyalty. Not one single Northern Whig voted for it whereas the majority of Southern Whigs did.19 Pro-Southern Whig, Archibald Dixon, summarised Southern Whigs aims for the act when he managed to convince Douglas to include a section in the Kansas-Nabraska Act which would repeal the Missouri Compromise which require slavery above the 3630 parrelel.20 The Whigs had been in decline in the South because of the effectiveness of the Democrats policies on slavery. The thirty-third United States Congress that begun in 1853 contained a mere two xii Southern Whigs, in comparison to 64 Democrats.21 Dixon hoped that by seizing the possibility on the issue he could regain the party much support in the south. Dixon believed that without the repeal of the Missouri Compromise explicitly included in the Act slaveholders would be unwilling to move into Kansas and Nebraska until slavery was in truth ap be by the settlers. Without slaveholders moving into the region before the vote was to be turn overn it would to the highest degree certainly be a free-soil effect. Dixon hoped that the introduction of the explicit repeal of the Missouri compromise into the Act would make pros lavery southern support the act and want to move into the new territories in time to influence the vote on slavery. In this way Dixon hoped he could take the support of the pro-slavery south from the democrats into the hands of the whigs. 22 After the repeal was secured a majority of Southern Whigs got behind the act because of closely solely regional reasons. Although the western expansion of the US and the transcontinental railway were supported, as they were by almost every member of congress, the issue of slavery had dwarfed these initial aims. 12 out of 19 Southern Whigs voted of the Kansas Nebraska Act, for those 12 it is safe to say that the issue of the potential expansion of slavery was the main motive. 6 out of the 7 Southern Whigs who opposed it were from the upper south.23 Every single of the 45 northerly Whigs, on the 26th May 1954, voted against the act. This could not be more evidence for the sectional divisions which emerged in the Whig party largely as a forget of the Kansas Nebraska Act.Enf of part oneNorthern WhigsAlthough examination of the Northern Whigs feelings toward the act tell us nothing of the positive hopes of the act and why it was voted in they reflect the reasons why the act was so controversial. To the Northern Whigs, and a lot of the population of the North, the Kansas Nebraska Act was seen as concerningly pro-southern. The North repeal of the Missouri Compromise and the Compromise of 1850, which had banned the expansion of slavery into the southern unorganised territories,meant that slavery was free to expand once again. This was certainly seen as a backward step by all abolitionists, but even those who wouldnt disunite themselves as abolitionist were concerned with the growing power of the South. The Kansas Nebraska Act reawakened sectional concerns in the north and south that had laid dormant since the Compromise of 1850. This sectional conflicts transferred as far as both parties in the two party system. Although the de mocrats showed greater unity that the whigs sectional differences were still evident. For the whigs, the Kansas Nebraska act tore them apart. Northern Whigs were outraged at the support of some of the Southern Whigs for the act, whereas Southern Whigs become more self-consciously Southern losing concern for party unity and policies.24The North popular soveriegty164 Opinionf of some northern democrats Douglas had turned traitor, they said, in return for slaveholder support for the presidency. This publicity relied heavily on deterrent example absolutes the Missouri Compromise was not just an act of Congress it was a sacred pledge. The repeal was not just a political maneauver it was the result of an atrocious plot. Douglas was not, conceivably, trying to find a way to keep Nebraska free and also get it organized he was a Judas, a benedict Arnold, selling Nebraska into slavery.Free SOilersThe North Kansas Nebraska undercoat 144 Settles were anxious to move in, but they could not legally corrupt the land until Congress organized a territory, the land was surveyed, and the government put it up for sale.According to the terms of the Compromise of 1820, slavery was forever prohibited from the area to be organized. feel Nothings + Two Party SystemThe Whigs were not the only party that the controversies of the Kansas Nebraska Act tore apart. The slavery issues stirred up up by the act were one of the primary reasons for the collapse of the Know Nothing Party. The Know nothings were a short lived, semi secretive, anti immigration political party. They enjoyed the peak of their success between 1854 and 1856. They were a semi-secretive, local, nature had allowed them to gain much success without having a divisive opinion on slavery. However, by their National Convention in June 1855 their success meant they were forced to take a stance on the issue of slavery. Eventually they took a stance which reaffirming the Kansas Nebraska Act causing many Northern Know Noth ings to leave the party concerned over the Southern influence over the party. Southern members also grew equally suspicious of northern members proslavery attitudes. By the middle of 1855, the party began to sort into sectional camps, a party built on unionism and xenophobia could no longer survive the sectional issues raised by Kansas Nebraska.25 Many expected that they might triumph at the 1856 elections but their support had dropped massively by that point largely due to the issue of slavery.The more that Southern quietude to the act become strong support, the quicker Northern opinion was wound up against it. Sectional differences overtook party loyalty. As a result the South voted almost solidly for the Kansas-Nebraska Act, and although a slight majority of Northern Democratic votes ensured its passage, there was, as a result huge northern outcry against the round lead to the formation of anti-Nebraska coalitions in many states to fight the mid-term elections in the gloamin g of 1854.26 Within a year or two of the introduction of Douglass bill, an progressively solid South faced a new North sectional party dedicated to resisting the further extension of slavery.27139-140 destruction of the two party system, interest became far to sectionalized, had begun way before Kansas Nebraska but was exacerbated by it.142 By 1853 the democrat party had split into three factions the Barnburners, now led by John A Dix the Softs, led by Marcy and the Hard, led by ex-senator Daniel S Dickninson.Antislaery congressman issued the Appeal of the Independent Democrats. Written by two abolitionist from Ohio Congressman Joshua Giddings and Senator Salmon P Chase the appeal proved to be one of the most effective pieces of political persuasion in American history. Quotes in book 414 fonerArguably the continued growth of the republican Party, a party who was born out of anti Kansas-Nebraska sentiment, is testimony to how much the issue continued to be divisive after 1854.Al ready sectional issues?Put in two party systemThere is plenty of historiography which debates the most meaning(a) consequences of the Kansas-nabraska Act. One which carries a lot of weight is that of Peter J Parish self-aggrandizing quote, maybe put in other sections 53ConclusionHolt (Political parties) 74Pairsh 52Holt 144Foner 414 putter 170Potter 170Foner 414Potter 172,173Potter 161Potter 161-162Holt 140Holt 147Parish 52Cooper 347The Road to Disunion glitz 1 Secessionists at Bay, 1776-1854 William W. Freehling. 556 (Oxford, 1991)Freehling 556Parish 53Parish 53Holt 143Cooper 350Holt 148Parish 53Billington, shaft of light Allen, The Protestant Crusade 1800-1860 A Study of the Origins of American Nativism, New York, 1938. 423Parish 53parish

No comments:

Post a Comment