The Kansas-Nebraska Act by John Hoptak

1. Quill and Musket Guest Lecturer Series The Kansas-Nebraska Actby John Hoptak

2. Overview • The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 was one of several key events of the tumultuous 1850s that divided the nation and led to the outbreak of civil war. • The Act, introduced by Senator Stephen Douglas, was originally intended to create a transcontinental railroad across the heartland of America to the Pacific Coast and in the process organize the Kansas and Nebraska Territories. • However, heated debate soon arose as to whether slavery would be permitted to expand into this new territory. • The results only served to further divide the United States along sectional lines, caused terrible violence in Kansas, gave rise to the newly-formed Republican Party, and brought the nation one step closer to civil war.

3. Reynolds’s Political Map of the United States in the mid-1850s, showing slave states in gray, free states in pink, unorganized territories in green. . .and Kansas (at the center of it all) in white.

4. Lecture Notes • The rallying cry of many white Americans in the three decades preceding the Civil War was Manifest Destiny, a belief that it was the God-given right of the United States to spread across the North American continent, settling it and spreading their views and ways of life from ‘sea to shining sea.’ There was little concern for those who may have stood in the way. • Already we have seen this notion of Manifest Destiny display itself with such acts and events as the Monroe Doctrine, the Indian Removal Act/Trail of Tears, the annexation of Texas, and the Mexican-American War. The nation was fast growing. But at the same time, it was dividing apart over the issue of whether slavery should or would be extended into the new American lands and territories. • Wrapped up in this ever-increasing desire to push westward and conquer the continent was a push to construct a transcontinental railroad. Leading the way in this endeavor was Illinois Senator Stephen A. Douglas, a powerful leader of the Democratic Party, and one of the most influential persons of the mid-Nineteenth Century. Douglas, who wished to reward his adopted state of Illinois by choosing Chicago as the eastern terminus of the railroad, was certainly not the first to be so dedicated to the establishment of a transcontinental railroad, but all previous attempts at crafting legislation for it foundered on the House or Senate floors. The debate that prevented its passage was whether such a lucrative venue would follow a Northern or a Southern route. There was also much heated debate over whether this railroad would be funded by public funds or if it would be privately financed.

5. Illinois Senator Stephen A. Douglas

6. The debate reached a whole new level in 1853 when it became inextricably linked with the issue of slavery. The House of Representatives passed a bill that would formally organize the Nebraska Territory, a critical first-step in the construction of a railroad that would follow a northern route. In the Senate, however, the bill died. Led by Missouri Senator David Atchinson, southern, slave-holding senators, declared that they would only agree to this northern concession if slavery were allowed to spread into the Nebraska territory. Such a demand was in direct contradiction, or violation, of the Missouri Compromise of 1820, which prohibited slavery north of the 36th Parallel. What began as a discussion of where a transcontinental railroad should be constructed had now escalated into a fight between pro and anti-slavery forces, a debate between North and South. • Senator Douglas endeavored to find a solution. In early 1854, he introduced new legislation, geared toward placating the powerful southerners both in Congress and within his own Democratic Party. In exchange for the formal organization of the Nebraska Territory and the selection of a northerly route for the railroad, with Chicago being its eastern terminus, Douglas would allow for popular sovereignty in the new territories, or the rule of the people as to whether to allow slavery, which was a direct repeal of the Missouri Compromise. He further agreed to the formation of two territories: Nebraska and Kansas. • It was a powerful bill, and one that Douglas expected would “raise a hell of a storm,” especially in the North. But with the support of President Franklin Pierce, who was initially fearful of the firestorm it would cause between North and South, the Kansas-Nebraska Act passed.

7. Political Cartoon Showing Southerners “Forcing” Slavery Down The Throats of Free-Soilers.

8. In sum, the Kansas-Nebraska Act created the new territories of Kansas and Nebraska, opening this land for settlement, repealed the long-standing Missouri Compromise and introducing instead popular sovereignty, leaving it to the settlers of these territories whether to allow slavery. What it caused was turmoil. • To say the Kansas-Nebraska Act set off a firestorm would be an understatement. Douglas may have been too optimistic in his thought that this act would smooth relations between the North and South, thinking it would please both sides. • In the wake of this disastrous legislation, the Whig Party met its death and more than 70% of northern Democrats who voted for its passage lost their seats in the Congressional elections that fall. Believing the Act catered to the southern slaveholders, former Whigs, and northern Democrats who opposed Douglas’s measures, rallied together with abolitionists and Free-soilers to form a new party, the Republican Party. Among those who decided to reenter the political world because of his anger with the Kansas-Nebraska Act was Abraham Lincoln, of Illinois, who in 1858 would run against Douglas for his Senate seat and lose, but who in 1860 became the first Republican elected to the White House.

9. The Kansas-Nebraska Act Triggered Violence in Kansas, between Pro and Anti-Slavery Forces

10. The Act also reignited the fierce debate over slavery, which many hoped was settled with the Great Compromise of 1850. But perhaps most troubling was the terrible violence triggered by the Kansas-Nebraska Act. Pro-slavery advocates, including Senator Atchinson of Missouri, hoping to eventually add another slave state to the Union, encouraged residents of slave states to temporarily settle in Kansas in order to vote for slavery. They were taken to task by abolitionists who promoted settlement of Kansas by anti-slavery and abolitionist forces, even helping to finance their settlement. It was not long before this volatile mixture led to bloodshed, in what newspaper editor Horace Greeley declared, “Bleeding Kansas.” • In the end, the Kansas-Nebraska Act was a failure, only serving to further strain and sever the bonds between North and South. This Act would turn out to be yet another stepping-stone on the road to civil war. • Postscript: Kansas would be admitted to the Union in January 1861, as a free-state. Nebraska would join the Union in 1867, after the Civil War finally settled the persistent problem of slavery.

11. For Further Reading • Etcheson, Nicole. Bleeding Kansas: Contested Liberty in the Civil War Era. Lawrence: The University Press of Kansas, 2004.   • Fellman, Michael. Inside War: The Guerrilla Conflict in Missouri During the American Civil War. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1989 • Foner, Eric. Free Soil, Free Labor, Free Men: The Ideology of the Republican Party Before the Civil War. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1970. • Holt, Michael. The Political Crisis of the 1850s. New York, NY: Wiley, 1978.   • McArthur, Debra. The Kansas-Nebraska Act and "Bleeding Kansas" in American History. Berkeley Heights, NJ: Enslow, 2003. • McPherson, James M. Battle Cry of Freedom: The Civil War Era. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1988.   • Nichols, Alice.Bleeding Kansas. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1954. • Rawley, James A. Race & Politics: "Bleeding Kansas and the Coming of the Civil War. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1979.