Lincoln versus Douglas: One Man's Fall is Another Man's Rise Essay example

He was a strong believer in popular sovereignity. Since he felt so strongly about it, he agreed that popular sovereignity would decide whether or not Kansas and Nebraska would be free states or slave states. This decision caused a huge disagreement between the North and South because this would allow slavery north of the Mason-Dixon dividing line created in the Missouri Compromise. The president at the time, Franklin Pierce, supported Douglas’ bill and passed it on May 30th, 1854.

In 1954, the Kansas- Nebraska Act was passed. Northern Democrat Steven Douglass in an attempt to build a transcontinental railroad petitioned the Kansas-Nebraska act on the bases that the Compromise of 1850 validated popular sovereignty. In Douglass’s opinion the Compromise of 1850 made the Missouri Compromise of 1820 void. There was opposition from Northern politicians who believed that the Missouri Compromise of 1820 was a sacred pact made by previous lawmakers during the union’s long history of compromises. For Southern politicians the Kansas- Nebraska Act would help the extension of slavery which most of the Northerners were against. Ignoring the wishes of the Northerners and pushing the Democratic agenda which wanted not only the

The freedom of America’s slaves has always been accredited to Abraham Lincoln, but he was not always the complete abolitionist as he is commonly portrayed. The “house divided”, as Lincoln depicts it in his famous ‘House Divided’ speech, of the United States during the Civil War, was not always lead towards the freedom of all mankind, and there is sufficient evidence to support this claim. The sixteenth president is most commonly remembered for inducing the courage and determination to end the Civil War, with the Emancipation Proclamation, although when it more closely studied he did not cross the great divide of enslavement vs. freedom with the submittal of that fabled document. When following the many famous quotes and speeches of Lincoln’s life, it appears that he was against all slavery and bondage. At the same time, when more closely examined, the quotes and speeches actually leaned towards his lack of strong opinion on the outcome of slavery. Lincoln is perceived as the most famous revolutionary of American history, but he does not live up to his legacy of being the eradicator of forced servitude.

territory. As northern settlers poured into Kansas, however, in 1861 it qualified for admission to the union as a state where slavery was illegal. So many Northerners were distraught over the Kansas-Nebraska Act that they founded a new, purely northern, purely anti-slavery political party. the 1854 Kansas-Nebraska Act created the territories of Kansas and Nebraska, opened new lands, repealed the Missouri Compromise of 1820, and allowed settlers in those territories to determine if they would allow slavery within their boundaries. The initial purpose of the Kansas-Nebraska Act was to create opportunities for a Transcontinental Railroad. It was not problematic until popular jurisdiction was written into the proposal. The act was designed by Senator Stephen A. Douglas of Illinois. The act established that settlers could vote to decide whether to allow slavery, in the name of "popular sovereignty" or rule of the people. Douglas hoped it would ease relations in both North and South, because the South could expand slavery to new territories but the North still had the right to abolish slavery in their states. He was wrong; opponents denounced the law as a privilege to the slave power of the South. The new Republican Party, which was created in opposition to the act, aimed to stop the expansion of slavery, and soon emerged as the dominant force throughout the

The first major reason of the civil war stems from Lincoln’s “House Divided” speech. Lincoln gives warning to the growing rift between the North and the South, the Anti-Slavery and the Pro-Slavery groups, as evidence in ‘I believe this government cannot endure permanently half slave and half free.’ Although the antagonism and eagerness of protecting the Union is not shown as prominently as future speeches, we can find a hint of caution in his tone. He goes on to support his claims through the hodgepodge of legislation that is the ‘Nebraska Doctrine’ and the legal crisis of the Dred Scott court case. He politely refers to this as ‘squabble’ and speak of the controversy and moral implication that they have caused. For his part, it is easy to see the insinuation of the speech- he believed slavery was immoral and was wholly incompatible with the principles of the Declaration of Independence embodied in the phrase

That is until the troubles of the Kansas-Nebraska Act occurred. Stephen Douglas was a Chicago native, and he believed that a transcontinental railroad that travelled through Chicago would be extremely to the Market Revolution in the city. This was a great idea, but it presented problems about whether the new territory established by the railroad would be a

In the book, The Radical and the Republican: Fredrick Douglass, Abraham Lincoln, and the triumph of Antislavery Politics, written by James Oakes connected the politics and the point of views of both Abraham Lincoln and Frederick Douglass towards the issue of slavery and the emancipation of slaves. Oakes interpretations of both men were very detailed in showing their reason and politics behind their positions they served in society on the topic of slavery. Abraham Lincoln, the republican, and Fredrick Douglass, the radical, two incredibly distinct people, yet both shared similar views towards their hatred on the institution of slavery and their highest hopes for freedom. “How can a relationship so different, yet a like lead to the road to emancipation of the slaves?” Both men had different reasons for their detestation toward slavery, yet both worked to bring the emancipation and fix the injustice regarding the slaves.

This book was a view on slavery between during the Civil War. It shows the different views of the Republican Party of Abraham Lincoln and Frederick Douglass. These two had very different views at first, but then learned to adapt to each other and eventually became great friends.

At the insistence of Southern leaders, he made clear that his bill would render the Missouri compromise inoperative and void. Furthermore, the bill, as amended divided the region into two distinct territories. Douglas miscalculated grievously. He thought that reopening the slavery question would be a minor matter, even though he opposed slavery."(Morrison pg. 586) Morrison shows in this statement that raising the issue of slavery once again was no big thing for Douglas. He disregarded his beliefs over issues of slavery to get his billed passed. Theirs evidence of Douglas interest to obtain southern support even on Basset's Short History of The United States. "[Douglas] favored a new territory in the region through which the proposed Pacific road would run, and he may have adopted Atchison's idea because he saw it was the only way to get the support of the southerners."(Basset pg.487)

The debates were a controversial time, which the proslavery, and antislavery rights people argued over. Both wanted a seat in the senate, but had many problems with people choosing who was fit to take that senate seat. The debates took a long time, and was a period of seven debates. The important subjects in the paper are causes of the debates, content of the debates, and the results of the debates. The causes of the debates were not only disagreement of Lincoln and Douglas, but also the big changes happening in the nations.

Throughout the history of mankind, slavery has existed in one form or another. Since the times of ancient civilizations to modern era subjugations, there have forces who feel strongly of its necessity and purpose, while others have devoted themselves to seeing the ideas and acts of slavery abolished. America is not an exception to the concept of slavery and during the nation’s early history, parties from both sides have been made famous for their beliefs in the continuation or the denouncement of slavery in the United States. To understand the contrasting views of pro-slavery advocates versus abolitionists in antebellum America, a comparison of the individual positions must be made to further understand the goals of each party.

The creator of the act was Senator Stephen A. Douglas of Illinois, who wanted to see citizens be able to settle in these territories. Underlying it all, Douglas’s real desire was to build a transcontinental railroad to go through Chicago. Although opposition was intense, The Kansas-Nebraska Act was finally passed by congress on May 30, 1854. It allowed settlers in the territories of Kansas and Nebraska to decide whether slavery would be legal or not within their borders based on popular sovereignty. Territory north of the 36°30' parallel was now open to popular sovereignty as Northern leaders’ moods grew darker than the midnight sky. This sudden change in affairs largely contributed to the humongous political change that was about to happen next.

The freedom of America’s slaves has always been accredited to Abraham Lincoln, but he was not always the complete abolitionist as he is commonly portrayed. The “house divided”, as Lincoln depicts it in his famous ‘House Divided’ speech, of the United States during the Civil War, was not always lead towards the freedom of all mankind, and there is sufficient evidence to support this claim. The sixteenth president is most commonly remembered for inducing the courage and determination to end the Civil War, with the Emancipation Proclamation, although when it more closely studied he did not cross the great divide of enslavement vs. freedom with the submittal of that fabled document. When following the many famous quotes and speeches of Lincoln’s life, it appears that he was against all slavery and bondage. Although when they are more closely examined, the quotes and speeches actually leaned towards his lack of strong opinion on the outcome of slavery. Lincoln is perceived as the most famous revolutionary of American history, but he does not live up to his legacy of being the eradicator of forced servitude.

The event that started the chain reaction of the American Civil War was the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854. This bill was created and implemented by Stephen Douglas, a Democratic Senator out of Illinois, shortly after he steps in after Henry Clay. With the intention of becoming president, Stephen Douglass wanted to organize territory from the Louisiana Purchase, with also building a railroad that would stretch across the Midwest, however, an important question

However, blundering politicians contributed significantly to its failure. Stephen Douglas created a number of problems when he tried pass the Kansas - Nebraska Bill, although Northerners were keen to see Nebraska developed, Southerners were less enthusiastic, due to the fact that it lay north of latitude 36 30. and by the terms of the Missouri compromise all new states would eventually enter the Union as Free states. Douglas knew he needed Southern support to enable the bill to be passed in congress; this meant he would have to change the bill so that the South had a chance of expanding slavery in this area. Although in theory slavery could move Northwards, Douglas felt that due to the climate problems this was highly unlikely. Douglas, a great believer in popular sovereignty saw no problem in letting the people of Kansas - Nebraska decide their own fate. Douglas believed that in doing this he had succeeded in winning over the South without conceding much in return. However, Douglas had miscalculated the feeling in the country. Between 1854 and 1856 there were a number of issues that arose, primarily due to both sides trying to influence popular sovereignty. A significant individual error was made by President Pierce who appointed Andrew Reeder, a pro-slaver, as governor of the territory. It was obvious from that start that he was incapable of handling that situation. In the first elections pro-slavers from Missouri crossed