The FAILURE of Compromise Pre-Civil War [APUSH Review Unit 5 Topic 6] Period 5: 1844-1877
Summary
TLDRThis 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
- đïž The Compromise of 1850 temporarily eased tensions over slavery but ultimately failed to resolve the issue.
- đ Westward expansion and the question of whether slavery could exist in new territories were major points of contention.
- đ The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 allowed popular sovereignty to decide the slavery issue in new territories, leading to conflict and violence.
- đ The Kansas-Nebraska Act effectively overturned the Missouri Compromise of 1820, reigniting sectional tensions.
- đłïž The fraudulent voting in Kansas led to the establishment of two rival state legislatures, reflecting the deep division over slavery.
- đ The Dred Scott Decision of 1857 ruled that slaves were not citizens and had no right to sue, further polarizing the nation.
- đŠ The decision also stated that Congress couldn't limit the movement of slave owners' property, implying slavery could spread everywhere.
- đ The increasing division over slavery weakened the two-party system, leading to the demise of the Whig Party.
- đ The Democratic Party gained strength as a regional, proslavery party during this period.
- đșđž 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
đ° 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.
đ 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.
Mindmap
Keywords
đĄCompromise of 1850
đĄKansas-Nebraska Act of 1854
đĄPopular Sovereignty
đĄBleeding Kansas
đĄDred Scott Decision
đĄWhig Party
đĄDemocratic Party
đĄRepublican Party
đĄFree Soilers
đĄConscience Whigs
đĄElection of 1860
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 Heimlerâs History. Now weâve been going through Â
Unit 5 of the AP U.S. History curriculum and in the last video we considered the Compromise of Â
1850 which put a band aid on the gushing neck wound of Americaâs abject regional division Â
over the issue of slavery. And that calmed things down for a while. But ultimately, Â
any attempt to compromise over this issue ultimately failed, and that failure is what Â
this video is all about. So if youâre ready to get them brain cows milked, letâs get to it.
Now Iâve already taken all the mystery out of it for you: every attempt at compromise Â
regarding slavery failed, but itâll be important to consider just what Â
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 Â
time period is because America just couldnât stop gathering up new lands in the west. And every time Â
that happened, the question of whether slavery could exist in those new territories erupted all Â
over again. Iâm not going to tell you about the Compromise of 1850 in this video since thatâs what Â
the last video was about, so letâs move forward in time and see what other compromises were made, Â
and first up is the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854. Now if you look at this map, you can clearly see Â
that this northern section of the Louisiana Purchase was above the 36 30 line which means, Â
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 Â
parts: the Kansas territory and the Nebraska Territory. Additionally, he proposed that each Â
territory decide by popular sovereignty whether to allow slavery or not. And just in case you forgot, Â
popular sovereignty just means that the people living in those territories could Â
decide for themselves whether to allow slavery. And if youâre listening closely, Â
youâll no doubt see why the proposal of the Kansas-Nebraska Act enraged some Americans, Â
especially those of the Northern persuasion. By passing this law, Congress effectively Â
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 Â
between pro-slavery and anti-slavery folks. And why wouldnât it? If the people themselves got Â
to decide the slavery question then clearly each side was going to fight in order to gain control Â
of the territory. This violence became known as Bleeding Kansas, and the violence continued on Â
and off for several years. But in 1855 when it came time to elect a territorial legislature, Â
and therefore decided once and for all the fate of Kansas with respect to slavery, something kind of Â
wonky happened. According to voter rolls, there were something 1500 men eligible to vote. But Â
when the votes were counted, there were like 6000 votes. Now, Iâm just a humble history teacher who Â
barely passed high school Algebra, but even IÂ can see that those numbers are a little kooky.
As it turned out, the explanation for all those additional votes wasnât that much of Â
a puzzle. Missouri, right next door, was a slave state, and at the news that a new Â
territorial legislature was being elected, thousands of pro-slavery Missourians flooded Â
across the border and cast illegal votes for a pro-slavery territory. It was clearly fraudulent, Â
but the pro-slavery folks in Kansas didnât concede. Nor did the anti-slavery folks. Â
And so what was the solution? Two rival state legislatures were established in Kansas. The Â
pro-slavery folks wrote up a constitution and established their legislature in Compton while Â
the anti-slavery folks refused to recognize the authority of a fraudulent constitution Â
and wrote their own governing document and set up a rival legislature in Topeka. To Â
make the fracture even worse, president Franklin Pierce went ahead and recognized Â
the pro-slavery government as legitimate and the anti-slavery government as fraudulent.
Now I hope youâre starting to see why westward expansion and slavery are causing people to lose Â
their ever-loving minds during this period. Okay, so that was one attempt at compromise and it was, Â
in no uncertain terms, a failure. Letâs look at another attempt, namely, Â
the Dred Scott Decision of 1857. This was a case bright before the Supreme Court that had massive Â
consequences for the slavery question. So the story goes like this. Dred Scott was an enslaved Â
man who lived in Missouri and he was taken by his master to live in Illinois and Wisconsin, Â
both places where slavery was illegal. And so on account of that, Dred Scott sued his Â
master for his freedom arguing that by virtue of living in free territory for two years, Â
he was indeed free. Seems like a decent argument to me. However, Chief Justice Roger Taney who Â
was a Southern Democrat handed down a decision along with the majority of the Court against Â
Scottâs argument. And the reasons behind the decision were as follows. First, Dred Scott, Â
as a slave, was not a citizen and therefore had no right to sue in federal court. Second, Â
the Constitution clearly states that Congress can not deprive any citizen of property. Therefore, Â
if enslaved people were property, then slave owners could take them anywhere they wanted Â
without fear of being deprived of their property. So are you listening? Do you realize what that Â
decision effectively accomplished? If slave owners could now take their âpropertyâ anywhere Â
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, itâs not hard to see how Â
weâre headed towards full scale civil war at this point. But there was still one step left to take, Â
and that was the election of 1860, which Iâll take up in the next video. But for now we need Â
to consider how this boiling national anger affected the political parties.
In a nutshell, the increasing division over slavery weakened the two party Â
system significantly. The Whig Party was the first casualty of this division as the result Â
of the Kansas Nebraska Act. The party became bitterly divided between a proslavery faction, Â
who called themselves Cotton Whigs and antislavery Whigs who called themselves Â
Conscience Whigs. At the same time that the Whig party was going the way of the dodo, Â
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, Â
namely the Republican Party, was born in 1854 which gathered together under one banner a Â
seriously diverse group of folks. Under the Republican banner you had former Â
members of the Know Nothing Party, you had abolitionists, you had free soilers, Â
you had Conscience Whigs, and quite a few others. Now to be clear, the Republicans Â
did not advocate the abolition of slavery, they merely argued that slavery should not be able to Â
spread into new territories. But that nuance was lost on the Southern Democrats who saw Â
this party as a fundamental threat to the institution of slavery everywhere.
And in 1858, which was a year of midterm elections, the Republicans Â
actually did pretty well in their congressional races. And that deeply frightened Southerners Â
because a presidential election was coming in 1860, and if a Republican Â
was elected to that office, it would, in their eyes, mean the demise of the South.
Iâve got more videos on Unit 5 right here, so click this playlist if you want to keep Â
studying. Additionally, if you need help getting an A in your class and a five on your exam in May, Â
for you then subscribe and I shall oblige. Heimler out.
Voir Plus de Vidéos Connexes
The Kansas-Nebraska Act (1854) and Bleeding Kansas Summary
The Election of 1860 & the Road to Disunion: Crash Course US History #18
How did the American Civil War Actually Happen? (Part 1) - From 1819 to 1861
causes of the civil war
#5 Problems Arising from the the Compromise of 1850; 1850 - 1856 - AICE US History 1.2 Part 1
The Supreme Court Case That Led to The Civil War | Dred Scott v. Sandford
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)