5.6_Failures of Slavery Compromise

Compromise of 1850: Definition and Context

A series of 5 separate legislative bills passed by Congress to resolve the political confrontation between slave and free states regarding the status of territories acquired during the Mexican-American War (1846-1848). It took place during a period of increasing sectionalism where the balance of power in the Senate was threatened by Western expansion.

The Exigence of the Compromise of 1850

The primary exigence was the 'Crisis of 1850,' triggered by California's request for admission as a free state, which threatened to disrupt the equal balance of slave and free states. The acquisition of vast new lands after the Mexican-American War created an urgent need to determine where slavery would be permitted, as previous boundaries were unclear or disputed.

Cause and Effect: The Compromise of 1850

Cause: The need to organize territories gained from Mexico and address Southern threats of secession over the admission of California. Effect: While it delayed conflict for a decade, it was inherently ineffective—likened to a 'jellyfish trying to blow up balloons.' By 1860, the failure to resolve these core issues led directly to state secession and the start of the Civil War.

Compromise of 1850 — Continuity and Change: Slavery Legislation

Continuity: It represents the ongoing trend of the Federal government utilizing fragile legislative compromises to temporarily preserve the Union, following the precedent set by the Missouri Compromise of 1820. Change: It signaled a shift away from strict geographic lines (36^{\circ}30') toward popular sovereignty, a shift that culminated in the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 and the eventual disregard of earlier slavery compromises.

Definition of the Kansas-Nebraska Act (1854)

A law proposed by Illinois Senator Stephen Douglas that created the territories of Kansas and Nebraska and mandated that the status of slavery in these territories would be determined by popular sovereignty.

Historical Context the Kansas-Nebraska Act (1854)

Preceded by the Missouri Compromise of 1820 (36^{\circ}30' line) and the acquisition of new territory after the Mexican-American War, which reignited debates over whether new states should be free or slave-holding.

Exigence and Motivation the Kansas-Nebraska Act (1854)

The primary urgency was the organization of Western territories to facilitate the construction of a transcontinental railroad passing through Illinois, Douglas's home state, to boost its economy.

Cause and Effect the Kansas-Nebraska Act (1854)

Cause: The need to organize territories for settlement and the railroad. Effect: Effectively repealed the Missouri Compromise, led to the violent "Bleeding Kansas" conflict between pro-slavery and anti-slavery settlers, and catalyzed the formation of the Republican Party.

Continuity and Change the Kansas-Nebraska Act (1854)

Change: Shifted the legal determination of slavery from a fixed geographic line (36^{\circ}30') to popular sovereignty. Continuity: Maintained the ongoing and escalating sectional polarization between the North and South that eventualy led to the Civil War.

Stephen Douglas

An Illinois Senator who was a major political figure in the mid-19^{th} century, best known for his role in the legislative compromises regarding slavery.

Values and Beliefs of Stephen Douglas

A strong advocate for “popular sovereignty,” the belief that inhabitants of a territory should decide by vote whether to allow slavery, rather than having the federal government mandate it.

Douglas Impact of the Kansas-Nebraska Act (1854)

Introduced by Douglas, this act effectively overturned the Missouri Compromise of 1820, leading to the violent period known as “Bleeding Kansas” and intensifying the sectional rift that sparked the Civil War.

Stephen Douglas's Economic Motivation

His promotion of territorial organization in the West was partially driven by the desire to have the transcontinental railroad pass through Illinois, which would significantly boost his state's economic growth.

Definition: Bleeding Kansas

A period of violent guerrilla warfare and intense political conflict between pro-slavery and anti-slavery settlers in the Kansas Territory from 1854 to 1859.

Context: The Kansas-Nebraska Act

Introduced in 1854 by Stephen Douglas, this act proposed that inhabitants of the Kansas and Nebraska territories would decide on the slavery issue through popular sovereignty, effectively disregarding the Missouri Compromise of 1820.

Bleeding Kansas Exigence: Transcontinental Railroad

Senator Stephen Douglas was motivated to organize these territories to ensure a transcontinental railroad would pass through Illinois, boosting his home state's economic growth through trade and traffic.

Bleeding Kansas Cause: Implementation of Popular Sovereignty

The lack of clear voting eligibility rules led both pro-slavery and anti-slavery advocates to flood Kansas to influence the outcome, resulting in fraudulent voting and the establishment of two rival state governments.

Bleeding Kansas Effect: Radicalization and Violence

The conflict resulted in approximately 50 deaths and proved that the slavery debate was transitioning from legislative debate to physical bloodshed, signaling the failure of national compromises.

Bleeding Kansas Continuity and Change: End of Compromise

Bleeding Kansas represents a significant change from the earlier era of fragile political balances, like the Missouri Compromise line at 36^\circ 30', to a state of open sectional warfare that served as a precursor to the Civil War.

Context: The Caning of Charles Sumner (1856)

The event occurred in the U.S. Senate chamber during a period of extreme sectional polarization and failed compromises regarding the expansion of slavery into new territories like Kansas.

The Caning of Charles Sumner (1856) Exigence/Cause: Sumner's Speech

Republican Senator Charles Sumner delivered a provocative speech titled "The Crime Against Kansas," in which he insulted Southern politicians and specifically targeted Senator Andrew Butler of South Carolina.

The Caning of Charles Sumner (1856) Definition: The Event

Preston Brooks, a member of the House and a relative of Andrew Butler, approached Sumner at his Senate desk and beat him severely with a cane until Sumner was unconscious and the cane broke.

The Caning of Charles Sumner (1856) Effect: Sectional Reaction

The North viewed Sumner as a martyr for freedom of speech and the anti-slavery cause, while the South celebrated Brooks as a hero, sending him replacement canes and demonstrating the total breakdown of civil political discourse.

The Caning of Charles Sumner (1856) Continuity and Change in Political Conflict

The event marked a significant 'change' as political disagreements escalated from verbal debate to physical violence within the halls of Congress, while 'continuity' was seen in the ongoing, unresolved struggle over the status of enslaved people.

1854 Congressional Elections - Definition and Context

A pivotal midterm election cycle occurring in the immediate aftermath of the Kansas-Nebraska Act. These elections served as a national referendum on the issue of popular sovereignty and the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, marking a transition toward strictly sectional politics.

1854 Congressional Elections - Exigence

The immediate exigence was the public outrage and political instability caused by the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854. This act disregarded the 36^\circ 30' line and allowed for the possible expansion of slavery into northern territories, forcing voters to choose candidates based on their stance on expansion.

1854 Congressional Elections - Cause and Effect

Cause: The introduction of popular sovereignty by Stephen Douglas and the subsequent 'Bleeding Kansas' violence. Effect: The collapse of the Whig Party and the emergence of the Free Soil Republicans in the North, while the Democratic Party became increasingly concentrated in the South.

1854 Congressional Elections - Continuity and Change

Change: The abandonment of bisectional political parties (parties with both Northern and Southern members) in favor of parties representing geographic interests. Continuity: The ongoing struggle to balance federal authority with states' rights regarding property and slavery remained the core ideological conflict.

Southern Democrats

A political faction concentrated in the South by 1854 that advocated for states' rights and the expansion of slavery. Their impact included the promotion of popular sovereignty through the Kansas-Nebraska Act, which aimed to extend slavery into new territories, significantly contributing to the sectional rift.

Free Soil Republicans

A political party concentrated in the North that emerged in response to the expansion of slavery. Their primary values included opposing the spread of slavery into new territories while accepting its existence in current slave states. Their existence solidified northern resistance against what they termed the 'Slave Power' following the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854.

Stephen Douglas (Democrat)

An Illinois Senator and prominent Democrat who introduced the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854. Driven by the exigence of securing a transcontinental railroad for Illinois, he believed in popular sovereignty. His actions led to the nullification of the Missouri Compromise and the violent 'Bleeding Kansas' conflict.

Charles Sumner (Republican)

A Republican Senator and staunch anti-slavery advocate. During the exigence of the Kansas conflict in 1856, he delivered a speech attacking southern politicians. After being violently caned by Preston Brooks, he became a martyr for the anti-slavery cause, deepening the political and emotional divide between the North and South.

Roger Taney (Judicial Impact)

The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court who delivered the ruling in Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857). His beliefs centered on the idea that black men could not be citizens and that property rights over slaves were absolute. This ruling served as a massive catalyst (exigence) for the Republican party's growth by effectively allowing slavery in all U.S. territories.

The Whig Party (Identity)

A major political party active in the mid-19th century, led by figures like Henry Clay and Daniel Webster, formed primarily in opposition to the 'executive tyranny' of Andrew Jackson.

Whig Party Values and Beliefs

Advocated for the 'American System,' which included support for a national bank, protective tariffs to encourage industry, and federal funding for internal improvements like roads and canals.

Whig Party Impact

Served as a centrist force for decades but eventually collapsed in the early 1850s due to internal divisions between Northern 'Conscience Whigs' and Southern 'Cotton Whigs' over the expansion of slavery.

The Know-Nothing Party (Identity)

Also known as the American Party, this was a secretive nativist political group composed of white, native-born Protestants who emerged in response to an influx of Irish and German Catholic immigrants.

Know-Nothing Values and Beliefs

Deeply anti-Catholic and xenophobic; they believed that immigrants were a threat to American democracy and sought to extend the period of naturalization for citizenship to 21 years.

Know-Nothing Party Impact

Briefly became a powerful third party in the mid-1850s, winning several local and state elections, but quickly declined as the national debate shifted from immigration to the existential crisis of slavery.