More handpicked essays just for you.
Progress of the kansas and nebraska act
Progress of the kansas and nebraska act
American Anti-Slavery Society
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Progress of the kansas and nebraska act
One key issue between the two parts of the country was whether or not slavery would expand westward to any newly acquired territories. This had been an issue for a long time and ultimately after failing to reach a compromise the country fell back on popular sovereignty or letting people in the new territories decide whether or not they wanted slaver. This however provided no solution as can be seen in the incident “Bleeding Kansas”. This was a series of violent acts in Kansas between those who were for and against slaver.
With tensions high, it was only natural for proslavery and antislavery groups to desire to claim the state and tip the scales in their favor. Due to the growing immorality and violence within Kansas, sectionalism tore a bigger hole through the nation. Once the Kansas-Nebraska
The Kansas-Nebraska Act was a bill that essentially disregarded and relinquished the Missouri Compromise. The Kansas-Nebraska Act stated that any westward expansion of the United States was to have the decision on slavery made via popular sovereignty. Popular sovereignty, in regards to the Kansas-Nebraska Act, was the idea that the decision on slavery in a region should be decided by the people who live there. This seemed fair, but the issue with instating popular sovereignty was that the parameters of the Missouri Compromise stated that slavery could not exist anywhere above the 36°30° line (History.com). Therefore, popular sovereignty would entirely disregard important factors of the Missouri Compromise, which was regarded by many as a strong force in holding the Union
The 1854 Kansas-Nebraska Act was an act, which allowed new territories to decide if they were a free or slave state by popular sovereignty (Civilwar.org, Kansas-Nebraska Act). Kansas-Nebraska Act negated the Missouri Compromise. Missouri Compromise was an effort by the congress to diffuse the political rivalries triggered by the request of Missouri in 1819 for admission as a state in which supported slavery (Garraty and Foner). This was done to restore the balance of slave and free states at the time. Kansas-Nebraska Act violated the compromise that was made in the Missouri Compromise, it reignited the disagreement between the anti and pro-slavery factions, which lead to violent events.
Many of the political events lead us into battles, like the Kansas-Nebraska Act during 1854. Senator Stephen Douglass, had thought that popular sovereignty seemed liked an excellent way to decide whether slavery would be allowed in Nebraska Territory. Douglas introduced a bill in congress on January 23, 1854 that would divide the area into two territories. Nebraska is in the north and Kansas is in the south, since the Kansas and Nebraska territory lay north of the Missouri Compromise line of 36°30’ and thereof it was legally closed to slavery. Kansas and Nebraska Act became a law in 1854.
Bleeding Kansas" was the nickname given to the conflicts the came about this time and helped pave a path for the American Civil War. Douglas stated that he wanted to see Nebraska form into a territory and band with the southern states and allow slavery. If Kansas was to allow slavery, that would break the rules of the Missouri Compromise. For the
Bleeding Kansas led to many tragic things like over 60 deaths, but it was also an important part of American history. During Bleeding Kansas there were many people fighting for what the believed in. Back during the time when Bleeding Kansas took place many people believed slavery was right and should be legal and some people disagreed completely. Now most people believe slavery is wrong is slavery is illegal in
Slave Power was the term that was present in the Missouri debates of 1820s and became popular in the 1830s. Salmon P. Chase used the term to portray southern slaveholders organized politically as a clique to dominate the national government and state governments in the south, reverse the policy of founding fathers, and make slavery the ruling interest of the nation. [1] As the Slave Power grew more powerful, the Republicans severely criticized these slave owners in the south “unceasingly aggressive, insatiably greedy for still more representatives and senators, and increasingly hostile to public policies.” [2] The slaveholders dominated the federal and southern state governments and used the political leverage to foster the institution’s growth
At the time Kansas was embroiled in a battle to become admitted to the Union as either a slave or free state. Anti slavery and pro slavery factions were sending people to the state to both legally and illegally influence the state. Abolitionists from New England gave money to members of an expedition of the free soil party who wanted to influence the vote in Kansas. Pro slave Missourians snuck over state lines to vote in Kansas. The residents of Missouri knew what was happening in the neighboring states.
The United States was a turbulent and politically divided place in 1850’s and leading up the Civil War. The Kansas Territory exemplified the treacherous nature of the U.S. experiencing all the issues that Congress tried to ignore in order to hold together the Union. Nicole Etcheson details the events in her book Bleeding Kansas: Contested Liberty in the Civil War Era. Most people used the name Bleeding Kansas to describe the violent atmosphere of the territory. The violence stemmed from Stephen A. Douglas’s idea of popular sovereignty that is allowing the people to vote on the admission of slavery into the state’s constitution.
People were murdered, brutally injured, or financially hurt in the name of slavery; for and against it. Many of the laws passed for slavery caused citizens to rebel and act out against the government. The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 was the epitome of these rebellions. The Kansas-Nebraska Act stated that popular sovereignty would be used to establish if a state was a free state or a slave state. This act abolished the Missouri Compromise Line, which allowed all states North of the line to be free states and all states South of the line to become slave states, ("Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854.
Overall, John Brown’s Harpers Ferry raid played a significant role in shaping Bleeding Kansas. Similarly, the Kansas-Nebraska was a major part of Bleeding Kansas. The previous paragraphs show other factors that contributed to Bleeding Kansas but, the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 is possibly the most important component. “This is evidenced by people calling it a “controversial bill that disrupted the entire political establishment” this is because the act changed caused people with strong opinions on slavery to all move to Kansas or Nebraska and this started the wars in Bleeding
The Democrats endorsed the “popular sovereignty” approach to slavery expansion that was used in the Kansas-Nebraska act. Their platform stated that new territories should decide themselves whether to be slave or free by popular vote; however, anti-slavery northerners feared that this result in the expansion of slavery further westward, a major fear of the Republican party. The Republican
The Kansas Nebraska Act was a law passed by congress in 1854. The main reason it is passed is because Steven Douglass attempted to get a transcontinental railroad through California. He thought that the quickest process of building a railroad would be to re organize the rest of Louisiana territory into two territories (Staff, History.com Kansas Nebraska Act).He owned land in this area, and he wanted to get the railroad to go through his land (Staff, History.com Kansas Nebraska Act) . The Kansas- Nebraska Act would cancel out the Missouri Compromise. When Kansas wanted to join the union, the people of the area were able to vote if they wanted it to be slave free or pro slavery.
This act allowed the territories of Kansas and Nebraska to decide themselves if they wanted to be slave or free. Many people flocked to these territories to vote. Northerners and Southerners bribed many people to move to the territories and vote for or against slavery. Pro-Slavery settlers won the first election, but anti-slavery settlers charged them with fraud and another election was held. Violence erupted while the second election was taking place.
