Chapter 19: Drifting Toward Disunion 1854-1861 Flashcards
- How did each of the major crisis events of the 1850s contribute to the advent of the Civil War?
Throughout the 1850s, many major crisis events erupted that contributed to the coming of the Civil War. In 1855, when Kansas was to elect members for its legislature, many people who lived in Missouri that were in favor of slavery came into Kansas to vote. Antislaveryites were unable to stop this injustice, and in response established their own government. Kansas now had two governments, both of which were operating on illegal principles. John Brown further contributed to the crisis in Kansas. He led several followers and murdered five men who were proslaveryites, setting off a Civil War in Kansas in 1856. When James Buchanan became president, he put his influence behind the Lecompton Constitution because of the strong southern hold over him. Senator Douglas then fought back, advocating democracy and fairness. The tussle resulted in a vote, and Kansas would remain a territory until 1861.President Buchanan had gained some enemies in the North because of his foul play, and he therefore split the Democratic party. This was the splitting of one of the last ropes that held the Union together. In 1857, the Dred Scott decision caused a massive uproar among antislaveryites, who felt that the ruling of the Supreme Court was a biased decision. Southerners responded with anger over what they saw as insensible defiance.
- Why did Douglass popular sovereignty approach to the slavery question prove to be unworkable in Kansas and elsewhere?
Douglas’s “popular sovereignty” was the idea that the sovereign people of a territory should decide whether they wanted their territory to permit slavery. This approach was unworkable in Kansas because people who were not a part of the territory (Missouri) came in and voted in favor of slavery. In response, free-soilers set up their own government. This led to much tension which could not be averted by popular sovereignty. When Kansas applied for statehood on the basis of popular sovereignty, southerners who favored slavery were in control and therefore drafted a proslavery constitution. The free-soilers refused to vote for this constitution, and it was approved in 1857.
- What did the Supreme Court decide in the Dred Scott case? Did the Court do too much in its ruling or was it within its traditional Constitutional boundaries? What effect did the decision have in the territories, in the North, and in the South?
On March 6, 1857, a black slave named Dred Scott sued for freedom. He had lived in Illinois and Wisconsin Territory, which was free soil, with his master for five years. The court ruled that Scott was not a citizen and therefore did not have the right to sue. The court then declared that, as private property, a slave could be taken into any territory, even a free territory, and be legally enslaved. They ruled that the Compromise of 1820 was unconstitutional and Congress had no power to ban slavery from territories, no matter what the legislatures of the territories wanted. The court went too far in its rulings; the case could have simply ended with the ruling that Scott was not a citizen instead of going so far. Even so, the Supreme Court sunk to a low level by choosing to regard Scott as property rather than a person. Because he was a person and had God given rights like any other person in the United States, he should have been granted freedom. The Dred Scott decision caused an uproar among Republicans and those who wanted slavery to end. They felt that the ruling was more of an opinion than a decision. Southerners were more than satisfied with the decision, but were also in uproar about the defiance of the North.
- Why was sectional compromise impossible in 1860, when such compromises had previously worked in 1820 and 1850? Since Lincoln had guaranteed to protect slavery in the states where it existed, why did the seven southern states secede as soon as he was elected?
In 1860, sectional compromise was impossible to reach because of the degree to which the conflict had risen. Even the compromises of 1820 and 1850 were not as effective as their perpetrators intended. Tensions between the South and North had risen so much that both sides were too bitter to be willing to agree to anything. The Dred Scott decision, “Bloody Kansas,” and other crisis had ensured a war.
The seven southern states seceded as soon as Lincoln was elected because they did not approve of his “sectional” ideas. South Carolina had threatened to leave the Union even before Lincoln’s election, and stayed true to their promise. Even though Lincoln had guaranteed to protect slavery in the states where it existed, the states felt that the politics of the time favored the North, and the Republican Party threatened southern rights. Also, abolition and criticism of slavery was spreading, which they greatly disliked. They wanted to become independent of the North and not be forced to end slavery, which they thought would happen, even though Lincoln said he would protect it.
