Pro slavery cartoon 1850


  • Kansas-Nebraska Act and Bleeding Kansas
  • THE KANSAS-NEBRASKA ACT
  • The Abolition Seminar
  • Discover More
  • The West India Interest and the Parliamentary Defence of Slavery, 1823-33
  • Proslavery Cartoon, 1850
  • Kansas-Nebraska Act and Bleeding Kansas

    In , voters went to the polls in a presidential contest between Whig candidate Winfield Scott and Democratic candidate Franklin Pierce. Both men endorsed the Compromise of Pierce did not take a stance on the slavery issue.

    The brief period of tranquility between the North and South did not last long, however; it came to an end in with the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Act.

    This act led to the formation of a new political party, the Republican Party, that committed itself to ending the further expansion of slavery. Pressure had been building among northerners to organize the territory west of Missouri and Iowa, which had been admitted to the Union as a free state in This pressure came primarily from northern farmers, who wanted the federal government to survey the land and put it up for sale.

    Promoters of a transcontinental railroad were also pushing for this westward expansion. Proslavery southerners now contended that popular sovereignty should apply to all territories, not just Utah and New Mexico. They argued for the right to bring their slave property wherever they chose.

    Attitudes toward slavery in the s were represented by a variety of regional factions. Since the s, abolitionists, led by journalist and reformer William Lloyd Garrison, had cast slavery as a national sin and called for its immediate end.

    For three decades, the abolitionists remained a minority, but they had a significant effect on American society by bringing the evils of slavery into the public consciousness. By the s, some abolitionists advocated the use of violence against those who owned slaves. In , the Liberty Party, whose members came from the ranks of ministers, was founded; this group sought to work within the existing political system, a strategy Garrison and others rejected. Meanwhile, the Free-Soil Party committed itself to ensuring that white laborers would find work in newly acquired territories and not have to compete with unpaid slaves.

    It is important to note that, even among those who opposed the expansion of slavery in the West, very different attitudes toward slavery existed. Some antislavery northerners wanted the West to be the best country for poor whites to go and seek opportunity. They did not want white workers to have to compete with slave labor, a contest that they believed demeaned white labor.

    Radical abolitionists, in contrast, envisioned the end of all slavery, and a society of equality between blacks and whites. Others opposed slavery in principle, but believed that the best approach was colonization; that is, settling freed slaves in a colony in Africa. The growing political movement to address the issue of slavery stiffened the resolve of southern slaveholders to defend themselves and their society at all costs. As abolitionists fanned the flames of antislavery sentiment, southerners solidified their defense of their enormous investment in human chattel.

    This map shows the new territories of Kansas and Nebraska, complete with proposed routes of the transcontinental railroad. As these different factions were agitating for the settlement of Kansas and Nebraska, leaders of the Democratic Party in and sought to bind their party together in the aftermath of intraparty fights over the distribution of patronage jobs.

    Illinois Democratic senator Stephen Douglas believed he had found a solution—the Kansas-Nebraska bill—that would promote party unity and also satisfy his colleagues from the South, who detested the Missouri Compromise line. In January , Douglas introduced the bill. The act created two territories: Kansas, directly west of Missouri; and Nebraska, west of Iowa.

    The act also applied the principle of popular sovereignty, dictating that the people of these territories would decide for themselves whether to adopt slavery. Douglas hoped his bill would increase his political capital and provide a step forward on his quest for the presidency. Douglas also wanted the territory organized in hopes of placing the eastern terminus of a transcontinental railroad in Chicago, rather than St. Louis or New Orleans. After heated debates, Congress narrowly passed the Kansas-Nebraska Act.

    In the House of Representatives, the bill passed by a mere three votes: to This move had major political consequences. The Democrats divided along sectional lines as a result of the bill, and the Whig party, in decline in the early s, found its political power slipping further. The new Republican Party pledged itself to preventing the spread of slavery into the territories and railed against the Slave Power, infuriating the South. As a result, the party became a solidly northern political organization.

    As never before, the U. Proslavery Missourians who crossed the border to vote in Kansas became known as border ruffians; these gained the advantage by winning the territorial elections, most likely through voter fraud and illegal vote counting. By some estimates, up to 60 percent of the votes cast in Kansas were fraudulent. Once in power, they wrote a proslavery constitution, known as the Lecompton Constitution because President Pierce approved it at Lecompton, Kansas.

    The Lecompton Constitution Kansas was home to no fewer than four state constitutions in its early years. Its first constitution, the Topeka Constitution, would have made Kansas a free-soil state. A proslavery legislature, however, created the Lecompton Constitution to enshrine the institution of slavery in the new Kansas-Nebraska territories. In January , Kansas voters defeated the proposed Lecompton Constitution, excerpted below, with an overwhelming margin of 10, to The right of property is before and higher than any constitutional sanction, and the right of the owner of a slave to such slave and its increase is the same and as inviolable as the right of the owner of any property whatever.

    The Legislature shall have no power to pass laws for the emancipation of slaves without the consent of the owners, or without paying the owners previous to their emancipation a full equivalent in money for the slaves so emancipated. They shall have no power to prevent immigrants to the State from bringing with them such persons as are deemed slaves by the laws of any one of the United States or Territories, so long as any person of the same age or description shall be continued in slavery by the laws of this State: Provided, That such person or slave be the bona fide property of such immigrants.

    How are slaves defined in the Kansas constitution? How does this constitution safeguard the rights of slaveholders? Many had come from New England to ensure a numerical advantage over the border ruffians. The New England Emigrant Aid Society, a northern antislavery group, helped fund these efforts to halt the expansion of slavery into Kansas and beyond.

    What can you deduce about the authors of each constitution? In , clashes between antislavery Free-Soilers and border ruffians came to a head in Lawrence, Kansas. The town had been founded by the New England Emigrant Aid Society, which funded antislavery settlement in the territory and were determined that Kansas should be a free-soil state.

    He did not have trouble finding volunteers from Missouri. Most of those who were indicted fled. Donaldson arrested two men without incident and dismissed the posse. However, Jones, who had been shot during an earlier confrontation in the town, did not leave. On May 21, falsely claiming that he had a court order to do so, Jones took command of the posse and rode into town armed with rifles, revolvers, cutlasses and bowie knives. At the head of the procession, two flags flew: an American flag and a flag with a crouching tiger.

    When the posse finally left, Lawrence residents found themselves unharmed but terrified. The next morning, a man named John Brown and his sons, who were on their way to provide Lawrence with reinforcements, heard the news of the attack. Before the night was done, the Browns visited two more cabins and brutally executed two other proslavery settlers. None of those executed owned any slaves or had had anything to do with the raid on Lawrence.

    This undated image shows the aftermath of the sacking of Lawrence, Kansas, by border ruffians. Shown are the ruins of the Free State Hotel.

    Distancing themselves from William Lloyd Garrison and other pacifists, Brown and fellow abolitionists believed the time had come to fight slavery with violence. The violent hostilities associated with Bleeding Kansas were not limited to Kansas itself. Note the title of the cartoon; it lampoons the southern ideal of chivalry, the code of behavior that Preston Brooks believed he was following in his attack on Sumner. I mean the harlot Slavery. Brooks did not challenge Sumner to a duel; by choosing to beat him with a cane instead, he made it clear that he did not consider Sumner a gentleman.

    The attack by Brooks left Sumner incapacitated physically and mentally for a long period of time. Despite his injuries, the people of Massachusetts reelected him. By , the American or Know-Nothing Party had evolved into a national force committed to halting further immigration. Its members were especially opposed to the immigration of Irish Catholics, whose loyalty to the Pope, they believed, precluded their loyalty to the United States.

    On the West Coast, they opposed the entry of immigrant laborers from China, who were thought to be too foreign to ever assimilate into a white America. The election also featured the new Republican Party, which offered John C. Fremont as its candidate. Republicans accused the Democrats of trying to nationalize slavery through the use of popular sovereignty in the West, a view captured in the political cartoon Forcing Slavery Down the Throat of a Free Soiler.

    The cartoon features the image of a Free-Soiler settler tied to the Democratic Party platform while Senator Douglas author of the Kansas-Nebraska Act and President Pierce force a slave down his throat.

    This political cartoon, Forcing Slavery Down the Throat of a Free Soiler, by John Magee, shows Republican resentment of the Democratic platform—here represented as an actual platform—of expanding slavery into new western territories.

    The Democrats offered James Buchanan as their candidate. Buchanan did not take a stand on either side of the issue of slavery; rather, he attempted to please both sides. His qualification, in the minds of many, was that he was out of the country when the Kansas-Nebraska Act was passed. In the above political cartoon, Buchanan, along with Democratic senator Lewis Cass, holds down the Free-Soil advocate.

    Buchanan won the election, but Fremont garnered more than 33 percent of the popular vote, an impressive return for a new party. The Whigs had ceased to exist and had been replaced by the Republican Party. The Democrats courted the Catholic immigrant vote. The Republican Party was a thoroughly northern party; no southern delegate voted for Fremont. Section Summary The application of popular sovereignty to the organization of the Kansas and Nebraska territories ended the sectional truce that had prevailed since the Compromise of The act also upended the second party system of Whigs and Democrats by inspiring the formation of the new Republican Party, committed to arresting the further spread of slavery.

    Many voters approved its platform in the presidential election, though the Democrats won the race because they remained a national, rather than a sectional, political force. This was a turning point for Brown and many other radical abolitionists, who—unlike their largely pacifist counterparts, such as William Lloyd Garrison—came to believe that slavery must be extinguished by any means necessary, including open violence. Authored by: P. Provided by: OpenStax College.

    THE KANSAS-NEBRASKA ACT

    Douglas introduced a bill for organizing the Nebraska Territory whereby he sought protection for commerce with California and New Mexico and for emigration to Oregon by building a transcontinental railroad. If the bill had passed, under the terms of the Missouri Compromise of , slavery would have been prohibited because Nebraska was part of the Louisiana Purchase and the validity of the quarter-century-old legislation would not have been seriously challenged.

    Nine years later, however, when Douglas, as chair of the Senate Committee on Territories, pushed for another bill organizing Nebraska, the question of slavery could not be sidestepped. Douglas was recognized nationally for his role in the Compromise of and promoted as a serious contender for the Democratic presidential nomination in By the opening of Congress in December , he felt emboldened to organize a stable territorial government over the vast Nebraska area to facilitate the building of a Pacific railroad, thereby fulfilling his vision of an integrated transcontinental United States.

    On January 4, , he supported a Nebraska bill that had been submitted by an Iowa senator weeks earlier, but now with an important twist: without mentioning the Missouri Compromise or the slavery ban it mandated, the bill empowered the inhabitants of the territory to decide the question of slavery for themselves. The latter was adjacent to Missouri, where slavery had been permitted under the Missouri compromise. Although the division of the territory was interpreted as an implicit sanction of slavery in Kansas, the most intense reaction focused on the repeal of the Missouri Compromise.

    In this political cartoon of , a giant Free Soiler is being held down by top Democratic leaders, including President Pierce. Two of them stand on the Democratic platform, which calls for an expansion of slavery into Central America, Cuba, and Kansas. Although his motives were debated and he was denounced for giving in to southern pressure, Douglas genuinely believed in popular sovereignty, the doctrine that the majority of territorial inhabitants should have the same right as those of a state to decide all domestic matters, including slavery.

    Claiming to be neutral about the morality of slavery, Douglas argued that American history showed the institution had been continued or abolished by local majorities, not by federal mandates, even in territories where Congress had prohibited it. Douglas celebrated this diversity and vitality of local self-government. He had been raised in rural Vermont and moved to upstate New York with his widowed mother when he was 17 years old, leaving at age 20 years because the requirements to become a lawyer there were too stringent.

    In Illinois, the rules and enforcement were very loose; therefore, before his 21st birthday Douglas had opened his own law office and immediately gained political prominence. Diversity among the states had enabled him to rise, and he wanted to extend that diversity to territories, despite the constitutional provision Article IV that authorized Congress to make all rules and regulations for federal land.

    A persuasive orator and a brilliant debater, Douglas secured overwhelming support for the Kansas-Nebraska Act in the Senate 37 votes to 14 on March 4, , but opposition in the House delayed a vote until May 22, when it passed to with minor changes to which the Senate acceded. President Pierce signed it into law on May 30, more than six months after the original bill had been introduced.

    For Douglas, the highest moral goal was the preservation of the Union, and to that end, he expected the Kansas-Nebraska Act would serve as a compromise comparable to what he had helped achieve four years earlier. His faith in popular sovereignty as a democratic principle led him to inflate its appeal and underestimate the anger that repeal of the Missouri Compromise would provoke.

    His vision of popular sovereignty was also predicated on an indifference to slavery and its expansion, because he believed in the superiority of the white race.

    Moreover, he did not anticipate how problematic implementing self-determination in Kansas would be. The Kansas-Nebraska Act demonstrates how public policy can have unintended consequences. In the aftermath of the Kansas-Nebraska Act came the transformation of the political party system and a bloody multiyear fight over slavery in Kansas.

    With sectional ties in the North and South threatening to override party loyalty, Douglas had intended to heal the sectional divisions over slavery that threatened the nation and the national party system. But while northern Democrats in the House split their votes evenly on the Kansas-Nebraska Act, all but two southern Democrats supported it. All northern Whigs opposed it, as did one-third of the southern Whigs in the House and two members of the Senate.

    Abraham Lincoln, out of public office for five years, re-emerged to condemn his long-time Illinois rival Douglas and the Act. He ran unsuccessfully for the Senate from Illinois that fall and afterward supported the fusion of the Whigs with the new Republican Party.

    For Lincoln and the new party, the threat of disunion was less menacing than the spread of slavery. The second major consequence of the Kansas-Nebraska Act was bloodletting on the plains of Kansas.

    Douglas believed that if the settlers there were left to decide the issue on their own, controversy over the legislation would be forgotten.

    He could not have made a more serious miscalculation. Whereas a flood of migration to California forced congressional deliberations on its statehood, the Nebraska legislation stimulated movement to the organized territories.

    At the time the act was passed, there were some white settlers in Kansas. By the first census the following March, there were more than 8, whites plus nearly enslaved persons. More than half the settlers were from adjacent Missouri and other slave states. Migration to Kansas quickly became a contest between organized pro- and antislavery groups seeking to establish their respective versions of popular sovereignty.

    The contest was not confined to balloting. Violence and intimidation occurred before and during elections as each side tried to remove people it considered interlopers whose only intention was to vote, not to settle the land. Which faction had a legitimate majority that would be permitted to decide the future of the territory? Republicans countered with their own free-state bill and a call to investigate election fraud in Kansas. Deliberations in Congress paralleled the eruption in the territory.

    The strategy of nonresistance turned the sack into a moral victory for Free Staters. Two nights later, abolitionist John Brown and his sons abducted and killed five proslavery settlers at Pottawatomie, Kansas. The city of Lawrence, Kansas, depicted in after attacks by proslavery forces. Review Questions 1. Stephen Douglas wanted to organize the Nebraska Territory to offset southern control of the Senate strengthen northern domination of the West facilitate building a transcontinental railroad establish himself as the great compromiser 2.

    Opposition to the Kansas-Nebraska Act primarily focused on its repeal of the Compromise of its repeal of the Missouri Compromise of the creation of the state of Kansas next to Missouri its impact on the two-party system 3. One major consequence of the Kansas-Nebraska Act was that it increased the number of slave states reduced North-South tensions led to the creation of the Republican Party destroyed the Democratic Party 4.

    Proslavery and Free-State forces in Kansas both wrote their own state constitutions compromised by voting for James Buchanan as President supported and ratified the Lecompton Constitution participated in the sack of Lawrence 5. Stephen Douglass genuinely believed the constitutional republic would best be served by nativism.

    The Abolition Seminar

    Discover More

    Douglas hoped his bill would increase his political capital and provide a step forward on his quest for the presidency. Douglas also wanted the territory organized in hopes of placing the eastern terminus of a transcontinental railroad in Chicago, rather than St. Louis or New Orleans. After heated debates, Congress narrowly passed the Kansas-Nebraska Act. In the House of Representatives, the bill passed by a mere three votes: to This move had major political consequences.

    The Democrats divided along sectional lines as a result of the bill, and the Whig party, in decline in the early s, found its political power slipping further. The new Republican Party pledged itself to preventing the spread of slavery into the territories and railed against the Slave Power, infuriating the South.

    As a result, the party became a solidly northern political organization. As never before, the U. Proslavery Missourians who crossed the border to vote in Kansas became known as border ruffians; these gained the advantage by winning the territorial elections, most likely through voter fraud and illegal vote counting.

    By some estimates, up to 60 percent of the votes cast in Kansas were fraudulent. Once in power, they wrote a proslavery constitution, known as the Lecompton Constitution because President Pierce approved it at Lecompton, Kansas.

    The Lecompton Constitution Kansas was home to no fewer than four state constitutions in its early years. Its first constitution, the Topeka Constitution, would have made Kansas a free-soil state. A proslavery legislature, however, created the Lecompton Constitution to enshrine the institution of slavery in the new Kansas-Nebraska territories. In JanuaryKansas voters defeated the proposed Lecompton Constitution, excerpted below, with an overwhelming margin of 10, to The right of property is before and higher than any constitutional sanction, and the right of the owner of a slave to such slave and its increase is the same and as inviolable as the right of the owner of any property whatever.

    The Legislature shall have no power to pass laws for the emancipation of slaves without the consent of the owners, or without paying the owners previous to their emancipation a full equivalent in money for the slaves so emancipated. They shall have no power to prevent immigrants to the State from bringing with them such persons as are deemed slaves by the laws of any one of the United States or Territories, so long as any person of the same age or description shall be continued in slavery by the laws of this State: Provided, That such person or slave be the bona fide property of such immigrants.

    How are slaves defined in the Kansas constitution? How does this constitution safeguard the rights of slaveholders? Many had come from New England to ensure a numerical advantage over the border ruffians. The New England Emigrant Aid Society, a northern antislavery group, helped fund these efforts to halt the expansion of slavery into Kansas and beyond.

    What can you deduce about the authors of each constitution? Inclashes between antislavery Free-Soilers and border ruffians came to a head in Lawrence, Kansas. The town had been founded by the New England Emigrant Aid Society, which funded antislavery settlement in the territory and were determined that Kansas should be a free-soil state. He did not have trouble finding volunteers from Missouri.

    The West India Interest and the Parliamentary Defence of Slavery, 1823-33

    Most of those who were indicted fled. Donaldson arrested two men without incident and dismissed the posse. However, Jones, who had been shot during an earlier confrontation in the town, did not leave. On May 21, falsely claiming that he had a court order to do so, Jones took command of the posse and rode into town armed with rifles, revolvers, cutlasses and bowie knives.

    Even then, they knew it would be a merely secondary concern for the Whigs, who, although friendlier to the idea of slave emancipation, were preoccupied with the reform of Parliament, not of the colonies. So, the abolitionists bided their time.

    The Christmas Rebellion in Jamaica, which saw 60, enslaved people rise up against the white colonists, struck a note of fear into ministers that, without emancipation, the Caribbean would be lost to civil war. Stephen and his immediatist allies bound hundreds of candidates to pledges in favour of emancipation, and with the West India Interest losing dozens of allies as rotten boroughs were disfranchised, the Commons that met in was the first in British history with a majority in favour of abolishing slavery.

    MT Michael will be responding to your questions about his research on the parliamentary resistance to the abolition of slavery between p. He is a historian of colonial slavery, the British Empire and the British Isles. He graduated with a double first in history from the University of Cambridge, where he earned his PhD — and also won University Challenge.

    If the bill had passed, under the terms of the Missouri Compromise ofslavery would have been prohibited because Nebraska was part of the Louisiana Purchase and the validity of the quarter-century-old legislation would not have been seriously challenged.

    Nine years later, however, when Douglas, as chair of the Senate Committee on Territories, pushed for another bill organizing Nebraska, the question of slavery could not be sidestepped.

    Proslavery Cartoon, 1850

    Douglas was recognized nationally for his role in the Compromise of and promoted as a serious contender for the Democratic presidential nomination in By the opening of Congress in Decemberhe felt emboldened to organize a stable territorial government over the vast Nebraska area to facilitate the building of a Pacific railroad, thereby fulfilling his vision of an integrated transcontinental United States.

    On January 4,he supported a Nebraska bill that had been submitted by an Iowa senator weeks earlier, but now with an important twist: without mentioning the Missouri Compromise or the slavery ban it mandated, the bill empowered the inhabitants of the territory to decide the question of slavery for themselves.

    The latter was adjacent to Missouri, where slavery had been permitted under the Missouri compromise. Although the division of the territory was interpreted as an implicit sanction of slavery in Kansas, the most intense reaction focused on the repeal of the Missouri Compromise. In this political cartoon ofa giant Free Soiler is being held down by top Democratic leaders, including President Pierce.

    Two of them stand on the Democratic platform, which calls for an expansion of slavery into Central America, Cuba, and Kansas. Although his motives were debated and he was denounced for giving in to southern pressure, Douglas genuinely believed in popular sovereignty, the doctrine that the majority of territorial inhabitants should have the same right as those of a state to decide all domestic matters, including slavery.

    Claiming to be neutral about the morality of slavery, Douglas argued that Huero buff death history showed the institution had been continued or abolished by local majorities, not by federal mandates, even in territories where Congress had prohibited it.

    Douglas celebrated this diversity and vitality of local self-government. He had been raised in rural Vermont and moved to upstate New York with his widowed mother when he was 17 years old, leaving at age 20 years because the requirements to become a lawyer there were too stringent.

    In Illinois, the rules and enforcement were very loose; therefore, before his 21st birthday Douglas had opened his own law office and immediately gained political prominence. Diversity among the states had enabled him to rise, and he wanted to extend that diversity to territories, despite the constitutional provision Article IV that authorized Congress to make all rules and regulations for federal land.

    A persuasive orator and a brilliant debater, Douglas secured overwhelming support for the Kansas-Nebraska Act in the Senate 37 votes to 14 on March 4,but opposition in the House delayed a vote until May 22, when it passed to with minor changes to which the Senate acceded.

    President Pierce signed it into law on May 30, more than six months after the original bill had been introduced.


    thoughts on “Pro slavery cartoon 1850

    1. Completely I share your opinion. In it something is and it is good idea. It is ready to support you.

    2. In it something is also to me your idea is pleasant. I suggest to take out for the general discussion.

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *