A Speech On The Crime Against Kansas

1513 WordsMar 14, 20167 Pages
Even on the highest level, the tension and angry spread between Senators from the North and the South. The craziest example was the “Bully” Brooks incident of 1857. During a session of Congress the senator from Massachusetts, Senator Charles Sumner delivered a very provoking speech. His speech “The Crime Against Kansas” was an attack against the Missourian Border Ruffians and the two senators Atchison, and Andrew Butler of South Carolina for the “crimes” that the South had committed to gain another slave state. Unfortunately, the young, hotheaded senator Preston S. Brooks, who happened to be Senator Butler’s nephew, could not stand for these accusations. On May 22, 1856 he attacked Sumner with his eleven-ounce cane until he it broke in…show more content…
The Democrats nominated James Buchanan, a respected Pennsylvania lawyer who had spent much time in London as of late serving as minister to Britain. As a result, had had no hand in the quarrel and was spotless, in that respect at least. The rapidly expanding Republican party and nominated Captain John C. Fremont. He was called the Pathfinder of the West, serving as a soldier/explorer. Will not a great political figure, he still had no part the Kansas, which automatically made him a plausible candidate (Kennedy and Cohen). The bleeding Kansas once again showed its face in the highest position in the land. The situation turned very dire for the anti-slavery men when the Supreme Court made the Dred Scott v. Stanford decision. The Dred Scott v. Stanford case took place when a black slave named Dred Scott sued his master for his freedom. Dred Scott argued that he deserved freedom because he had served his master for five years on free territory. The ruling by the Supreme Court said that since Dred Scott was a slave, his master’s private property, the Constitution did not allow the government to deprive someone of their property without due process of law. Also, as a slave, the court could have dismissed the case then and there, but they made a ruling and took it one step farther.
Open Document