Bleeding Kansas Essay

The first instance of violence came when abolitionist newcomers, including the infamous New England Emigrant Aid Company, in Kentucky carried rifles nicknamed “Beecher’s Bibles” chanting comments like “Ho for Kansas” out to make both new territories free states. Southerners, at the time of the newcomers arrival, had thought there was an unspoken understanding that Kansas would become a slave state and Nebraska a free state raising new feelings of betrayal. Bullets between the two disagreeing groups began to be shot. The turning point of Bleeding Kansas, however, came in 1856 when proslavery raiders burned and shot up a free-soil town called Lawrence. These violent explosions largely contributed to the effects of the Kansas-Nebraska Act of

When Brown was 55 he moved with his sons to Kansas territory after the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 overrode the Missouri Compromise, which resulted in the strict ban of slavery above a certain latitude. This was a huge deal to both pro-slavery and anti-slavery fighters for before this act was passed the United States only consisted of twenty-two states which were divided among the two groups of fighters. Winning this territory for slavery, or for those against it, could really make a statement. During the settling of Kansas the events of violent acts that occurred during the period (1855) is referred to as “Bleeding Kansas”. Violence pursued throughout the year 1855.

One key issue between the two parts of the country was whether or not slavery would expand westward to any newly acquired territories. This had been an issue for a long time and ultimately after failing to reach a compromise the country fell back on popular sovereignty or letting people in the new territories decide whether or not they wanted slaver. This however provided no solution as can be seen in the incident “Bleeding Kansas”. This was a series of violent acts in Kansas between those who were for and against slaver.

WE belive that when the vote to decide the outcome of Kansas is taken, there will be a flood of people from boardering states comeing in Many people from the neighboring slave state Missouri could possibly come in. This could sway the vote from the real residents of Kansas. They could also come in and try to pressure the true residents of Kansas with violence(2). Imagine going to the polling place and having a gun held to your head, this would make you want to change your vote to the opinion of the gun man. Tensions between the north and the south are already high, popular sovergnty could be the last straw before something worse happens between the north and the south.

Bleeding Kansas Bleeding Kansas or the Bloody Kansas period of violence during the settling of the Kansas territory and included the fight about whether or not the state should be a slave state or a free state. Stephen Arnold Douglas and Augustus C. Dodge of Iowa Kansas and Nebraska Conflict 1854 South wanted a slave state The Kansas-Nebraska Act setted the scene by allowing the territory of Kansas to decide for itself whether it would be free or slave.

DBQ: Political Disputes 1820-1860 For forty-four years, the United States of America was a thriving country. We had won our independence from Great Britain and we had started to create a country that would change the world. Yet, in the year 1860, a joined country and political agreement between all states seemed utterly impossible. People fought with each other so deeply about slavery, the country was divided between slave and free states. By the time of 1820 through 1860, political disagreement grew so large, there had been only one answer.

At the time Kansas was embroiled in a battle to become admitted to the Union as either a slave or free state. Anti slavery and pro slavery factions were sending people to the state to both legally and illegally influence the state. Abolitionists from New England gave money to members of an expedition of the free soil party who wanted to influence the vote in Kansas. Pro slave Missourians snuck over state lines to vote in Kansas. The residents of Missouri knew what was happening in the neighboring states.

Bleeding Kansas was a small civil war in which pro slavery and anti slavery people flooded into Kansas to fight under the doctrine of popular sovereignty. There was

Republicans from the North such as Abraham Lincoln were against the spread of slavery, and so Sen. Stephen Douglas made a symbolic move against the North, the territories which would have been unlikely candidates for slave-holding states were stormed by slaveholders from Missouri, and brief fighting broke out in Kansas. The North was struck again with the effect of the Dred Scott v. Stanford case, which ruled that slavery could not be banned in the United States. This was a setback to anti-slavery Northerners, who though fighting to keep slavery out of their states, were told that slavery must be allowed universally. Dred Scott v. Stanford ensured that the Northerners felt their values were being attacked, and began to rise defensively as they began to sense compromise would not work in their

Andrew Jackson- (1767-1845) The 7th president of the United and the first democrat in office. He was elected by popular vote and served two terms from 1829 to1837. Jackson was the first elected man from Tennessee and was often referred to as a statesman who represented the common man. In 1832, A political movement called the Jacksonian Demonocracy extended voter rights to men without land ownership.

This contributed to the Civil War. The result of the Kansas/Nebraska Act was Bleeding Kansas. The violence displayed that people were willing to go to complete extremes for their sides, even killing each other so that their way of life would have more power. Bleeding Kansas showed the divide between the regions because it was the first bloodshed in this conflict. Next was the Dred Scott Case where Roger Tany stated that black people were property, and property was property everywhere, meaning there were no free states.

The Kansas Nebraska Act also known as “Bleeding Kansas” was Douglas wanting to expand the intercontinental Railroad to expand south through slave states. Beginning in Chicago and splitting the territory of Kansas and Nebraska. This led Kansas to come into the Union on the foundation of population sovereignty, causing thousands of pro and anti-slavery forces to transfer to Kansas. When this happened this caused Kansas to become a battle ground. In the spring of 1855 led to a vote of 1600 legal voters in Kansas to vote for territorial legislature.

DBQ #3: Civil War and Reconstruction In the decade preceding the Civil War, tensions between the North and the South intensified. The Compromise of 1850, which freed California, implemented a more rigorous version of the Fugitive Slave Act, and made several other points was the last true attempt to peaceably resolve the tensions revolving around slavery. Starting in about 1854, the South began to accuse the North of refusing to comply with the Fugitive Slave Act, and at one point the Act was ruled unconstitutional by the Wisconsin Supreme Court. The Kansas-Nebraska Act in 1854 also contributed greatly towards the Civil War, as it triggered what later would become known as “Bleeding Kansas”.

It also raised tensions between the North and the South and created a violent atmosphere in Kansas. Pro-slavery and antislavery forces formed in Kansas when the vote for slavery was taking place. Those forces transformed Kansas into a state divided by two separate governments. Kansas had its own civil war that was a strong indication for a future war over slavery throughout the whole country. Next was the Dred

The impact of territorial expansion on the sectionalism in America In the Mid 1800s, due to manifest destiny, America was quickly expanding. However, a major effect of this rapid growth was the division of a nation, also known as sectionalism. Sectionalism is ones pride in their section and during the mid 1800’s, the recognized "sections" were the North and the South. When analyzing the causes and effects of sectionalism on the civil war, it can be concluded that territorial expansion played a huge part politically, economically, and socially.