ipl-logo

The Topeka Constitution

1124 Words5 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: The north and the south on slavery

Since the United States has existed, slavery has been secluded to the southern portion of the country. As time went on the northern states became increasingly progressive while southern states found more reasons to justify the treatment of African Americans. The free state party wanted whites and blacks to be free, would support the Topeka constitution since it is anti-slavery, and would support the United States of America in the Civil War. The border ruffians wanted African Americans to be enslaved by whites, would support the LeCompton constitution since it allowed slavery, and would support the Confederate States of America in the Civil War. The racial attitudes of the border ruffians and the free state party were due to many key differences …show more content…

The two different groups represent two opposing ideologies that were willing to go to extremes to achieve their goals. The Topeka constitution was created by the inhabitants of Kansas which did not allow slavery so the free state party would support this constitution (Hahn 11/10). Since Kansas was above the thirty-six and thirty parallel line many people from the north migrated there because it will become a free state any way until Kansas-Nebraska Act was passed which allowed popular sovereignty, that the Kansas and Nebraska territory can decide for themselves if the residents want to have slaves or not. Since the residents could vote on slavery many people from Missouri crossed the border into to vote illegally and these people were called the border ruffians (Hahn 11/10). When the border ruffians started voting illegally to decide on statehood which gave pro-slavery side a huge advantage and would support the LeCompton that allowed slavery, so people from nearby free states were getting upset to the point where John Brown a deeply religious absolutist from the north took upon himself and his followers to take action that would his group killing five people which started ‘Bleeding Kansas’ (Hahn 11/10). After this attack more armed conflicts rose between the two different groups that have different ideas and beliefs …show more content…

As each group represents one of two opposing sides in the Civil War free state party is the United States of America or the Union while the border ruffians is the Confederate States of America. The free state party wanted slaves to be free through justified means like religion from Great Awakening and Second Great Awakening were many preached that all humans are created equal and since everyone is on equal terms then no one should enslave another person (Hahn 10/11). Other then religion a lot of European countries already banned slavery within their empires. So to many Americans it would seem as barbaric if a majority of the developed world has gotten rid of something altogether while the land of the free still has something that even opposes what is written in the constitution “all men are created equal”. Like with the caning of Sumner where Preston Brooks used his cane to beat up Charles Sumner on the senate floor because Sumner was insulting the way of life of the south (Hahn 11/8). After this event happened both men with their matching side viewed them as defended the cause. On the other hand, the border ruffians truly believed that slavery is a good thing that even benefits the slaves. Patriarch society was dominated in south, where the head man of a plantation even viewed all of his slaves as being his children. With the Second Great Awakening which spread throughout the

Show More
Related
299 Words | 2 Pages

In Makers of America: Billy Yank and Johnny Reb, it was interesting to learn that Union and Confederate soldiers shared a common commitment to fight for the cause of liberty, independence, and republican government. However, their interpretation of liberty, independence, and government are very different. The societies from the Union were more literate, intellectual, practical, and efficient. Therefore, they abolished slavery because they think it was immoral and favored a strong central government to make things efficient. The societies from the Confederate were more emotional, religious, and personal.

Read More
1546 Words | 7 Pages

When the idea was presented in Congress, it sparked both outrage and highlighted some of the hypocrisy in the country at the time. While the Constitution and Declaration of Independence were written against the tyranny of England, they also allowed men to rule over others as slave masters, which abolitionists argued, went entirely against what the United States stands for: freedom and equality. Others, in favor of the institution of slavery, claimed that not only was slavery necessary for the new economy but that the Constitution and even the Bible were in favor of it. These opposite opinions highlighted some of radical differences in thought throughout the country and the government in their political parties. These political lines were drawn from the start of the debate on slavery, with the pro-slavery states to the south and anti-slavery to the north, with more neutral states in between.

Read More
564 Words | 3 Pages

Northern Democrats assumed that under this bill, slavery would never actually expand into the territories. They believe popular sovereignty would hold the land for the North. However, Southern Democrats believe that popular sovereignty would permit and protect slavery in the territories. Sothern’s believed that slaveholders had the same right as non-slaveholders to bring their property, including slaves, into the territories. When the Democratic Party had a convention in South Carolina, the Southern Democrats insisted that the party secures the rights of slaveholders to enter the territories.

Read More
1227 Words | 5 Pages

Before the events of Bleeding Kansas happened, Congress had to pass the Kansas-Nebraska Act. The second draft of the act championed by Stephen Douglas passed because it allowed popular sovereignty to decide if slavery would be permitted in the new territories. When understanding the events of Bleeding Kansas, it is best to follow the four distinct constitutions drawn up by the settlers. The first attempt at a constitution came from free-staters in Topeka. While the Topeka constitution prohibited slavery, it “clearly compromised the varied attitudes on race…” (75).

Read More
1317 Words | 6 Pages

Slavery was a controversial term between the Northern and the Southern states in the early US. The South was a tremendous supporter of slavery. The Southern farmers relied on the slaves to farm and finish labor. The North, on the other hand, despised slavery and wanted to banish it. A series of horrendous events led to what is now known as

Read More
706 Words | 3 Pages

The Democrats, are pro-slavery, but they were unable to take control due to a split within the party. Lincoln’s views on slavery are not clear, but he does wish for the slaves to fight for the Union. Due to this, the state of South Carolina has seceded. Other Southern States may follow South Carolina’s example and secede as well if something is not done. I am Alexander Stephens and I am member of the Whig Party and a Representative from Georgia.

Read More
1013 Words | 5 Pages

The Abolitionist movement and the Secession of the Confederates

Read More
120 Words | 1 Pages

They are both hoping to find a way to end slavery and everyone will be one, not half slave and half free. The Civil War reshaped American ideas about freedom because it brought a resolution that forever altered what it means to be an American.

Read More
67 Words | 1 Pages

However, in the 18th and 19th centuries there was a great deal of arguing and talk about freeing slaves between the Northern and Southern states, which the North really did not have a problem with freeing the slaves since they were leaning more toward the liberating lifestyle for all American people. The South was in between abolishing slavery. There were stereotyping going around the states about slaves.

Read More
223 Words | 1 Pages

If a southerner wants to get a slave all they have to is get a certificate from a southern judge saying that it is his or her slave. The northerners were outraged because slavery was outlawed in the north so they didn't want to be a part of it. Many of the northerners were abolitionists. An abolitionist is

Read More
937 Words | 4 Pages

Some owners came together and believed slaves were treated well and there is no rivalry or competition for employment of slaves and other free laborers. This opinion or belief spread across much of the continental United States and caused many individuals to jump on their side and share some of the same values and beliefs. Many of these slave owners believed that after president Lincoln implemented the Emancipation Proclamation or freeing of slaves should be a gradual process and all the slaves should not be released at once in case of a large rebellion or there was some work or jobs that still needed to be completed. As slavery started to diminish some elected officials and leaders still believed preserving the Union should be the primary war aim which is what caused the Civil War, but in all reality we know the actual events that had occurred and taken place. The people who believed slaves were treated fair and equal were obviously oblivious to the fact of how society was treating these poor African Americans and that could start to raise questions about the mental state of these people and how they value the life of other individuals

Read More
1862 Words | 8 Pages

I completely understand where my fellow delegates in the South are coming from as I was a previous slave-owning state in the south. However, slavery must be abolished gradually, a large-scale abolition would cause havoc for the American population, and fulfill the motives our Lord would want us to take, all men are equal, not varying from your skin color but united as

Read More
679 Words | 3 Pages

Shortly after the United States won territory to the Pacific in the Mexican-American War, Congress passed the Compromise of 1850 in an attempt to admit California as a free state but still appease the South with stronger fugitive slave laws (Demkin). They hoped this would fix the issue of the westward expansion of slavery but of course it did not. It created stronger sympathy among Northerners for escaped slaves and angered the south because it offset the feeble free state-slave state balance. This quick fix did not hold up long, and when Congress passed the Kansas-Nebraska Act in 1854 it only fueled the rage.

Read More
856 Words | 4 Pages

The United States should have never split in two if the south would have just taken into account hoe no one has the right to steal someone else's freedom just because their skin color, shape, size, and gender. The North had very strict ideals on slavery because of Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln was a good man who had great morals and wanted people to all be treated fairly so he set up a party to try to get rid of slavery. In the article “The American Civil War: A North-South Divide” by Tim Stanley who states “Abraham Lincoln’s Republican Party was a free labour movement – rabidly so.

Read More
837 Words | 4 Pages

Many people in the North started to oppose slavery, and by the late 1700’s many states in the North had outlawed it. Slavery went on in the South for almost another century until it was finally banned. This did not make free blacks free to live like everybody else, though. Free blacks in the North were not very free because of their limited freedoms in politics, economics, and in their social lives. Blacks in the North were not very free because they had very little social freedom.

Read More

More about The Topeka Constitution

Related Topics

Open Document