The FAILURE of Compromise Pre-Civil War [APUSH Review Unit 5 Topic 6] Period 5: 1844-1877

Summary

This video discusses the failed attempts at compromise over slavery in the U.S., focusing on the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 which allowed popular sovereignty to decide slavery's fate in new territories, leading to 'Bleeding Kansas.' It also covers the Dred Scott Decision, which declared slaves as property and unable to sue, further fueling sectional tensions. The script explores how these events contributed to the weakening of political parties and the rise of the Republican Party, setting the stage for the Civil War.

Takeaways

• 🏛️ The Compromise of 1850 temporarily eased tensions over slavery but ultimately failed to resolve the issue.
• 🌏 Westward expansion and the question of whether slavery could exist in new territories were major points of contention.
• 🔄 The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 allowed popular sovereignty to decide the slavery issue in new territories, leading to conflict and violence.
• 🔄 The Kansas-Nebraska Act effectively overturned the Missouri Compromise of 1820, reigniting sectional tensions.
• 🗳️ The fraudulent voting in Kansas led to the establishment of two rival state legislatures, reflecting the deep division over slavery.
• 📊 The Dred Scott Decision of 1857 ruled that slaves were not citizens and had no right to sue, further polarizing the nation.
• 🏦 The decision also stated that Congress couldn't limit the movement of slave owners' property, implying slavery could spread everywhere.
• 💔 The increasing division over slavery weakened the two-party system, leading to the demise of the Whig Party.
• 🐘 The Democratic Party gained strength as a regional, proslavery party during this period.
• 🇺🇸 The Republican Party emerged in 1854, advocating against the spread of slavery into new territories, alarming the South.

Q & A

What was the main issue that the Compromise of 1850 attempted to address?

The Compromise of 1850 attempted to address the issue of slavery and its expansion into new territories, which was causing significant regional division in America.

Why was the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 controversial?

The Kansas-Nebraska Act was controversial because it allowed the territories of Kansas and Nebraska to decide by popular sovereignty whether to allow slavery or not, effectively overturning the Missouri Compromise of 1820 and reigniting the debate over slavery in new territories.

What does 'popular sovereignty' mean in the context of the Kansas-Nebraska Act?

In the context of the Kansas-Nebraska Act, 'popular sovereignty' means that the residents of the territories had the power to decide for themselves whether to allow slavery within their borders.

What was 'Bleeding Kansas' and how did it relate to the Kansas-Nebraska Act?

'Bleeding Kansas' was a period of violent conflict between pro-slavery and anti-slavery factions in the Kansas Territory, which was a direct result of the Kansas-Nebraska Act allowing the question of slavery to be decided by popular vote.

How did the fraudulent voting in Kansas in 1855 affect the territorial legislature election?

The fraudulent voting in Kansas in 1855, where thousands of pro-slavery Missourians crossed the border to cast illegal votes, led to the establishment of two rival state legislatures in Kansas, one pro-slavery in Lecompton and one anti-slavery in Topeka.

What was the significance of the Dred Scott Decision of 1857?

The Dred Scott Decision of 1857 was significant because it ruled that enslaved people were not citizens and had no right to sue in federal court, and that Congress could not deprive slave owners of their property, which included enslaved people.

How did the Dred Scott Decision impact the possibility of slavery spreading into new territories?

The Dred Scott Decision effectively opened all territories and states in the Union to slavery by declaring that slave owners could take their 'property' anywhere without fear of being deprived of it.

What was the impact of the Kansas-Nebraska Act on the Whig Party?

The Kansas-Nebraska Act led to the division and eventual dissolution of the Whig Party, as it was split between pro-slavery Cotton Whigs and anti-slavery Conscience Whigs.

What was the stance of the newly formed Republican Party on slavery?

The Republican Party did not advocate for the abolition of slavery but opposed its expansion into new territories, which was seen as a threat by Southern Democrats.

How did the increasing division over slavery affect the two-party system in the United States?

The increasing division over slavery led to the weakening of the two-party system, with the Whig Party becoming the first casualty and the Democratic Party gaining strength as a regional, pro-slavery party.

What was the role of the election of 1860 in the context of the growing tensions over slavery?

The election of 1860 was a pivotal moment in the growing tensions over slavery, as the prospect of a Republican president threatened the South's way of life and the institution of slavery.

Outlines

00:00

🏰 The Failure of Compromises Over Slavery

The paragraph discusses the failure of political compromises over the issue of slavery in the United States, particularly focusing on the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854. The Compromise of 1850 was mentioned as a previous attempt to calm tensions that ultimately failed. The script explains how westward expansion led to continuous debates over whether slavery could exist in new territories. The Kansas-Nebraska Act allowed these territories to decide through popular sovereignty whether to allow slavery, which overturned the Compromise of 1820 and led to violent conflicts known as 'Bleeding Kansas.' The paragraph also highlights the fraudulent voting practices during the territorial legislature elections and the establishment of two rival state legislatures in Kansas, reflecting the deep divisions over slavery.

05:04

🚀 Political Realignment Over Slavery

This paragraph delves into the impact of the slavery issue on the political landscape of the United States in the mid-19th century. It describes the division within the Whig Party between proslavery Cotton Whigs and antislavery Conscience Whigs, leading to the party's decline. The Democratic Party's rise as a regional proslavery party is also mentioned. The paragraph then introduces the formation of the Republican Party in 1854, which united a diverse group including former members of the Know Nothing Party, abolitionists, free soilers, and Conscience Whigs. The Republicans opposed the spread of slavery into new territories, which was perceived as a threat by Southern Democrats. The paragraph concludes with the mention of the Republican Party's success in the 1858 midterm elections and the fear it instilled in Southerners ahead of the 1860 presidential election.

Keywords

💡Compromise of 1850

The Compromise of 1850 was a series of laws passed by the U.S. Congress to settle disputes about slavery in the territories gained after the Mexican-American War. It temporarily eased tensions between the North and the South over the issue of slavery but ultimately failed to provide a lasting solution. In the script, it's mentioned as a failed attempt to address the regional division over slavery.

💡Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854

The Kansas-Nebraska Act was a legislative measure that repealed the Missouri Compromise by allowing the new territories of Kansas and Nebraska to decide on the slavery issue through popular sovereignty. This act is highlighted in the script as a pivotal moment that led to increased sectional tensions and violence, known as 'Bleeding Kansas'.

💡Popular Sovereignty

Popular sovereignty was the idea that the people of a territory should decide whether to allow slavery within their borders. It's a central concept in the video, as it was the principle behind the Kansas-Nebraska Act and led to conflict and violence as different groups tried to sway the vote.

💡Bleeding Kansas

Bleeding Kansas refers to the period of violence between pro-slavery and anti-slavery forces in the Kansas Territory during the 1850s. The script describes it as a direct result of the Kansas-Nebraska Act and the ensuing struggle for control over the territory's future.

💡Dred Scott Decision

The Dred Scott Decision was a landmark ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court that declared African Americans, whether enslaved or free, were not U.S. citizens and therefore could not sue in federal courts. The decision is mentioned in the script as a significant event that further exacerbated tensions over slavery and had implications for the expansion of slavery into new territories.

💡Whig Party

The Whig Party was one of the major political parties in the United States during the early to mid-19th century. The script explains that the party was the first casualty of the division over slavery, splitting into proslavery 'Cotton Whigs' and antislavery 'Conscience Whigs', leading to its eventual demise.

💡Democratic Party

The Democratic Party is referenced in the script as gaining strength as a regional, proslavery party during the period of the Kansas-Nebraska Act. It was one of the two major parties in the United States at the time, and its stance on slavery was a key factor in the political landscape leading up to the Civil War.

💡Republican Party

The Republican Party emerged in the 1850s as a coalition of anti-slavery groups, including former Whigs, abolitionists, and free-soilers. The script notes that while they did not advocate for the abolition of slavery, they opposed its expansion into new territories, which was perceived as a threat by Southern Democrats.

💡Free Soilers

Free Soilers were a political faction that opposed the expansion of slavery into new territories, advocating instead for the availability of free land for white settlers. The script mentions them as part of the diverse group that formed the Republican Party.

💡Conscience Whigs

Conscience Whigs were members of the Whig Party who were against slavery. They are mentioned in the script as one of the factions that contributed to the formation of the Republican Party, highlighting the shift in political alliances over the issue of slavery.

💡Election of 1860

The election of 1860 is briefly mentioned at the end of the script as a future event that would further escalate tensions between the North and the South. It was a pivotal election that Abraham Lincoln, a Republican, won, leading to several Southern states seceding from the Union.

Highlights

The Compromise of 1850 temporarily eased tensions over slavery but ultimately failed.

The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 allowed popular sovereignty to decide slavery in new territories, overturning the Compromise of 1820.

The Kansas-Nebraska Act led to violence in Kansas as pro-slavery and anti-slavery groups fought for control.

The term 'popular sovereignty' refers to allowing residents of a territory to decide on slavery.

The fraudulent voting in Kansas' territorial legislature election led to the establishment of two rival governments.

President Franklin Pierce recognized the pro-slavery government in Kansas as legitimate.

The Dred Scott Decision of 1857 ruled that slaves were not citizens and had no right to sue in federal court.

The Supreme Court argued that Congress cannot deprive citizens of property, effectively allowing slavery in all territories.

The Dred Scott Decision implied that slavery could spread anywhere, escalating tensions towards civil war.

The Whig Party split over slavery, leading to its decline and the rise of the Democratic Party as a proslavery force.

The Republican Party was formed in 1854, uniting a diverse group opposed to the spread of slavery.

The Republican Party's stance against the spread of slavery was seen as a threat by Southern Democrats.

The 1858 midterm elections saw significant success for the Republicans, alarming Southerners.

The political landscape was shifting, with the two-party system weakening due to the division over slavery.

The upcoming 1860 presidential election was a critical point of concern for the South.

Heimler's History provides a comprehensive overview of Unit 5 of the AP U.S. History curriculum.

Transcripts

Hey there and welcome back to Heimler’s  History. Now we’ve been going through  

Unit 5 of the AP U.S. History curriculum and in  the last video we considered the Compromise of  

1850 which put a band aid on the gushing neck  wound of America’s abject regional division  

over the issue of slavery. And that calmed  things down for a while. But ultimately,  

any attempt to compromise over this issue  ultimately failed, and that failure is what  

this video is all about. So if you’re ready to  get them brain cows milked, let’s get to it.

Now I’ve already taken all the mystery out  of it for you: every attempt at compromise  

regarding slavery failed, but it’ll  be important to consider just what  

those attempts at political compromise were  and why they failed to solve the problem.

Now one of the main reasons politicians  were fighting over this issue during this  

time period is because America just couldn’t stop  gathering up new lands in the west. And every time  

that happened, the question of whether slavery  could exist in those new territories erupted all  

over again. I’m not going to tell you about the  Compromise of 1850 in this video since that’s what  

the last video was about, so let’s move forward  in time and see what other compromises were made,  

and first up is the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854.  Now if you look at this map, you can clearly see  

that this northern section of the Louisiana  Purchase was above the 36 30 line which means,  

according to the Compromise of 1820, that  slavery could not exist in that territory.

But in 1854 Senator Stephen Douglas of Illinois  proposed that this territory be divided into two  

parts: the Kansas territory and the Nebraska  Territory. Additionally, he proposed that each  

territory decide by popular sovereignty whether to  allow slavery or not. And just in case you forgot,  

popular sovereignty just means that the  people living in those territories could  

decide for themselves whether to allow  slavery. And if you’re listening closely,  

you’ll no doubt see why the proposal of the  Kansas-Nebraska Act enraged some Americans,  

especially those of the Northern persuasion.  By passing this law, Congress effectively  

overturned the Compromise of 1820 which  northerns held onto with exceeding tenacity.

One major fallout of the popular sovereignty  decision is that violence erupted in Kansas  

between pro-slavery and anti-slavery folks. And  why wouldn’t it? If the people themselves got  

to decide the slavery question then clearly each  side was going to fight in order to gain control  

of the territory. This violence became known as  Bleeding Kansas, and the violence continued on  

and off for several years. But in 1855 when it  came time to elect a territorial legislature,  

and therefore decided once and for all the fate of  Kansas with respect to slavery, something kind of  

wonky happened. According to voter rolls, there  were something 1500 men eligible to vote. But  

when the votes were counted, there were like 6000  votes. Now, I’m just a humble history teacher who  

barely passed high school Algebra, but even I  can see that those numbers are a little kooky.

As it turned out, the explanation for all  those additional votes wasn’t that much of  

a puzzle. Missouri, right next door, was  a slave state, and at the news that a new  

territorial legislature was being elected,  thousands of pro-slavery Missourians flooded  

across the border and cast illegal votes for a  pro-slavery territory. It was clearly fraudulent,  

but the pro-slavery folks in Kansas didn’t  concede. Nor did the anti-slavery folks.  

And so what was the solution? Two rival state  legislatures were established in Kansas. The  

pro-slavery folks wrote up a constitution and  established their legislature in Compton while  

the anti-slavery folks refused to recognize  the authority of a fraudulent constitution  

and wrote their own governing document and  set up a rival legislature in Topeka. To  

make the fracture even worse, president  Franklin Pierce went ahead and recognized  

the pro-slavery government as legitimate and  the anti-slavery government as fraudulent.

Now I hope you’re starting to see why westward  expansion and slavery are causing people to lose  

their ever-loving minds during this period. Okay,  so that was one attempt at compromise and it was,  

in no uncertain terms, a failure.  Let’s look at another attempt, namely,  

the Dred Scott Decision of 1857. This was a case  bright before the Supreme Court that had massive  

consequences for the slavery question. So the  story goes like this. Dred Scott was an enslaved  

man who lived in Missouri and he was taken by  his master to live in Illinois and Wisconsin,  

both places where slavery was illegal. And  so on account of that, Dred Scott sued his  

master for his freedom arguing that by virtue  of living in free territory for two years,  

he was indeed free. Seems like a decent argument  to me. However, Chief Justice Roger Taney who  

was a Southern Democrat handed down a decision  along with the majority of the Court against  

Scott’s argument. And the reasons behind the  decision were as follows. First, Dred Scott,  

as a slave, was not a citizen and therefore  had no right to sue in federal court. Second,  

the Constitution clearly states that Congress can  not deprive any citizen of property. Therefore,  

if enslaved people were property, then slave  owners could take them anywhere they wanted  

without fear of being deprived of their property.  So are you listening? Do you realize what that  

decision effectively accomplished? If slave  owners could now take their “property” anywhere  

they wanted, that means that any territory or  state in the Union would be opened to slavery.

Now knowing how tense everyone is about this  slavery question, it’s not hard to see how  

we’re headed towards full scale civil war at this  point. But there was still one step left to take,  

and that was the election of 1860, which I’ll  take up in the next video. But for now we need  

to consider how this boiling national  anger affected the political parties.

In a nutshell, the increasing division  over slavery weakened the two party  

system significantly. The Whig Party was the  first casualty of this division as the result  

of the Kansas Nebraska Act. The party became  bitterly divided between a proslavery faction,  

who called themselves Cotton Whigs and  antislavery Whigs who called themselves  

Conscience Whigs. At the same time that the  Whig party was going the way of the dodo,  

the Democratic Party was gaining  strength as a regional, proslavery party.

But the power of the Democrats would  not go unopposed for long. A new party,  

namely the Republican Party, was born in 1854  which gathered together under one banner a  

seriously diverse group of folks. Under  the Republican banner you had former  

members of the Know Nothing Party, you  had abolitionists, you had free soilers,  

you had Conscience Whigs, and quite a few  others. Now to be clear, the Republicans  

did not advocate the abolition of slavery, they  merely argued that slavery should not be able to  

spread into new territories. But that nuance  was lost on the Southern Democrats who saw  

this party as a fundamental threat to  the institution of slavery everywhere.

And in 1858, which was a year of  midterm elections, the Republicans  

actually did pretty well in their congressional  races. And that deeply frightened Southerners  

because a presidential election was  coming in 1860, and if a Republican  

was elected to that office, it would, in  their eyes, mean the demise of the South.

I’ve got more videos on Unit 5 right here,  so click this playlist if you want to keep  

studying. Additionally, if you need help getting  an A in your class and a five on your exam in May,  

for you then subscribe and  I shall oblige. Heimler out.