“Bleeding Kansas” had many senseless deaths and tragedies caused by the fight for slavery to either become a part of or become eradicated from the new state, Kansas. David Atchison was a major proslavery advocate who believed that slavery needed to be expanded because of its intrinsic value in the culture and economy of the South (Hollitz 210). Sara Robinson, on the other hand, believed that slavery was giving the South unfair political power while simultaneously giving them an economic power that was outdated and inhibiting to the future of the United States (213). Without ever meeting, these two influential figures went head to head in the issue of slavery and greatly influenced both of their parties. Robinson would eventually come out with the victory along with her “free soilers” group and would blaze a trail for many more to challenge the institution of slavery. Atchison would come to lose his battle and a portion of his great reputation and become known as the hell-raiser for his known and unknown relations with the violence during “Bleeding Kansas.” The events in Kansas seemed to bring up many issues that would come to change the face of the United States forever. Both Robinson and Atchison grew up in wealthy families but under very different circumstances. Atchison was from Kentucky and his father owned up to 8 slaves at one point (209). Robinson was raised in Massachusetts with an attorney for a father (212). With his charm and interest in political issues,
After the bill was passed, pro-slavery and anti-slavery supporters rushed in to settle in Kansas to affect the outcome of the first election. Pro-slavery settlers won the election, but were charged with fraud by anti-slavery settlers. The anti-slavery settlers held another election, but the pro-slavery settlers refused to vote. This resulted in two opposing legislatures within the Kansas territory. The opposition created violence between the two groups, causing many bloody battles that greatly increased the death rate, giving Kansas the nickname “Bleeding Kansas”. President Pierce, supporting pro-slavery, sent in Federal troops to stop the violence and disperse the anti-slavery legislature. Another election was held and pro-slavery supporters won. They were again charged with election fraud. As a result, Congress did not recognize the constitution the pro-slavery settlers adopted, and Kansas wasn’t allowed to become a state. Eventually,
The Compromise of 1850 brought relative calm to the nation. Though most blacks and abolitionists strongly opposed the Compromise, the majority of Americans embraced it, believing that it offered a final, workable solution to the slavery question. Most importantly, it saved the Union from the terrible split that many had feared. People were all too ready to leave the slavery controversy behind them and move on. But the feeling of relief that spread throughout the country would prove to be the calm before the storm.
Channing felt that acquiring Texas would not only spark conflict with Mexico but would also create problems in the United States in regards to slavery. This issue over the extension of slavery in Texas presaged Bleeding Kansas, a series of violent political confrontations involving anti-slavery Free Soilers and pro-slavery Southerners that took place in the Kansas Territory between 1854
More than any other event, the American Civil War went far in defining a United States that had been imperfectly and incompletely shaped by its first 70 years. For seven decades, the presence of slavery in a republic founded on principles of human freedom increasingly confused the political system and unraveled the social fabric. (Heidler, David S. and Jeanne T. Heidler. (2015)). Although slavery in the South had given rise to antislavery movements in the North as early as the American Revolution, a fresh vigor characterized the abolition movement in the 1830s. Arguments over the western territories clouded the country into a series of disruptive crises. Each was settled with an unsatisfying compromise that left most Southerners feeling materially cheated and many Northerners morally embarrassed. (Heidler, David S. and Jeanne T. Heidler. (2015)). Efforts to organize the Midwest region called the Nebraska Territory in 1854, led to the ill-conceived Kansas-Nebraska Act. It was yet another attempt designed to secure Southern support for the organization of what by prior agreement would have been a free territory. Kansas and Nebraska were created from the region under the principal of popular sovereignty, which was to say that each territory would decide for itself whether to admit or prohibit slavery. (Heidler, David S. and Jeanne T. Heidler. (2015)). That plan
This meant that there was a possibility of there being slavery in the new territories based on the decision of the people in those territories. This would allow for the spread of slavery which in turn would expand the slave trade helping slaveholders in the South. Popular sovereignty increased sectionalism instead of reducing it. In Kansas, the vote for slavery was bombarded by people who did not live in the state causing an incorrect evaluation of what the people wanted. This led to the creation of a second illegal government and fighting between the two different governments. This fight was so bad that Kansas became known as "Bleeding Kansas".
Three main events happened during Bleeding Kansas that influenced the Civil War. First, the Sack of Lawrence took place. The pro-slavery government in Kansas charged the anti-slavery government with treason. (Kansas had two governments. One was pro-slavery and the other anti-slavery.) Around eight-hundred men were sent to Lawrence to capture the anti-slavery leaders and found that they had fled. In anger, the group set the city on fire, ransacked buildings, and destroyed presses that printed anti-slavery newspapers. This infuriated the anti-slavery Americans
It was now that slavery became mixed up with state rights and just how much power a state had compared to federal authority. The key issue was whether slavery would be allowed in the newly created states that had joined the Union. The development of the Louisiana Purchase of 1803 in Kansas was purchased by the federal government. Kansas was officially opened to settlement in 1854 and there was a rush to settle in the state between those who supported slavery and those who opposed it. The state became a place of violence between the north and south and that’s how Kansas got the nickname ‘Bleeding Kansas’ in recognition of what was going on there. However, on January 29th 1861, Kansas was admitted to the Union as a slave-free state. Many in the
In 1854 another problem arose which resulted in Congress passing the Kansas-Nebraska Act which repealed the Missouri Compromise, this act was introduced by Stephen A. Douglas a chairman of Committee on Territories, this act allowed the people of Kansas and Nebraska to choose rather they wanted slavery in their boundary or not through the power of popular sovereignty, the Pro-slavery settlers won the election but were charged with accusations that they cheated, in order to make sure that the vote was right they ordered a re-election but the Pro-slavery refused and the refusal resulted into a battle. John Brown an Anti-slavery leader who believed that he was sent here by god to kill anyone who was pro-slavery. He led the anti-slavery force which gained the nickname “Bleeding Kansas”. The fight was soon stopped, and a final election was held, this time the anti-slavery settlers won the vote and was announced that Kansas would become a free state in 1861. In conclusion the Compromises and Acts may have had their flaws but it they some how manage to solve the slavery issues.
John Brown’s beliefs about slavery and activities to destroy it hardly represented the mainstream of northern society in the years leading up to the Civil War. This rather unique man, however, took a leading role in propelling the nation toward secession and conflict. Many events influenced Brown’s views on slavery from an early age. When he was older, his strong anti-slavery feelings had grown, and he became an extreme abolitionist. His raid on Harpers Ferry was one of the first monumental events leading up to the civil war.
At this time it seemed that the issue of slavery was the only problem in the United States, almost as if a slave was being forced down the throats of the freesoilers (Document F). Stephen Douglas drafted the Kansas-Nebraska Acts in hopes of adding two new states: Kansas and Nebraska. Although it seemed that one would be a slave state, and the other a free state, the slavery issue would be decided by popular sovereignty. Many opposed this decision but did not know how to deal with it. The reason they did not know was because the Constitution did not mention it. William Lloyd Garrison said “the Constitution which subjects them to hopeless bondage is one that we cannot swear to support” (Document E). He was trying to say that the constitution can’t answer the question of slavery because the words “slave” and “slavery” are not in the constitution.
A leading example of the struggles of slavery in the western states was the struggle over slavery in Kansas. Document F depicts a political cartoon basically stating that Stephen Douglas, Franklin Pierce, and James Buchanan all attempted intentionally or unintentionally to spread slavery to the West. Stephen Douglas proposed the Kansas-Nebraska Act in which the Midwest Nebraska territory would be divided into two states Kansas and Nebraska and the issue of slavery would be determined by in state vote known as "popular sovereignty". Franklin Pierce aided with the signing of the bill. The results upon this bill was harsh fighting between pro-slavery supporters and non-slavery supporters in Kansas over this issue. It also led to the non-reelection of Pierce and the end to the Whig party, along with the introduction of the sectional Republican party, who opposed the Kansas-Nebraska Act. An attempt at forcing slavery into
Finally, the issue of “Bloody Kansas” was a major political factor caused by westward expansion. Once it was resolved that Kansas’s stance on slavery would be determined by popular sovereignty, people flocked to Kansas to make their vote count. The “Border Ruffians” won the controversial vote, which resulted in Kansas being a slave state. However, the abolitionists refused to recognize the pro-slavery government, so they set up a second provincial government in Topeka, Kansas. This episode led to a skirmish between the Ruffians and the abolitionists, like in Lawrence, Kansas in May of 1856. This was a prelude to the actual civil war and showed that even if there was a “fair” vote to determine a Territories slave law, it didn’t mean that all the people would abide by the law. These political episodes involving the ever expanding west showed the weakness of the Union.
battled in the “Bleeding Kansas” conflict over whether the territory would be a free state or slave state. After the debate
This is when his mission started to become more and more violent. Brown published an essay instructing African Americans to stay together to resist this new law. He ordered them to even if it took killing the slave catchers, that’s what they had to do. He formed an armed resistance against the Fugitive Slave Law. Brown’s United League recruited 44 African Americans. Following this, the Kansas-Nebraska Act surfaced, which allowed settlers to decided whether or not to be free or to practice slavery. Then, in order to achieve the southern support in the 1856 Democratic presidential nomination, Stephen Douglas proposed to divide the new territory into two. This meant that Kansas, since it was in the more southern of the two territories, would be made into a slave state. This would lead to the start of an organized militia against slavery.
The role John Brown played the Civil War began in Kansas with his leading a "guerilla attack" on five pro-slavery men, on May 24, 1856. The targeted men were dragged, one after the other, from their homes and brutally murdered (Schultz, Mays, Winfree, 2010). The encounters were organized with the intention to rid the Pottawatomie creek area of all pro-slavery men that lived there (historynet.com). The strategy was designed as a counter attack for the Lawrence incident against abolitionists three days previously. The term "Bleeding Kansas" refers to the outbreak of violence the area experienced and suffered through. The division of Kansas at this time, half abolitionist and half pro-slavery, had caused a terrible friction throughout the territory.