How the compromise collapsed
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 20

How the Compromise Collapsed PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 57 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

How the Compromise Collapsed. Chapter 12: The Failure of the Politicians. How the Compromise Collapsed. Ironically, President Pierce , who declared his administration would not be controlled by seeking land, was the man to go full speed ahead searching for new territory.

Download Presentation

How the Compromise Collapsed

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


How the compromise collapsed

How the Compromise Collapsed

Chapter 12:

The Failure of the Politicians


How the compromise collapsed1

How the Compromise Collapsed

  • Ironically, President Pierce, who declared his administration would not be controlled by seeking land, was the man to go full speed ahead searching for new territory.

  • James Gadsden was sent to buy the northern part of Mexico and all of Lower California

  • Pierre Souléwent to Spain to buy Cuba.

  • Then after Hawaii was reached, Pierce looked into buying Alaska from the Russians.


How the compromise collapsed2

How the Compromise Collapsed

  • Mexico had no interest, but sold a small tract south of the Gila River

  • Northern congressmen, however, were opposed.

  • The Gadsden Purchase was only approved after 9,000 acres were removed from the treaty.

  • Expansion was no longer a means of compromise.

South of Rockys


The ostend manifesto

The Ostend Manifesto

  • President Pierce wanted to buy Cuba for slave territory but Spain would not sell.

  • Secretary of State William L. Marcy sent American ministers to Ostend in Belgium to shape the U.S. policy of Cuba in 1854.

  • The “Ostend Manifesto”, meant to be a secret dispatch to Marcy, reached the press and caused an uproar.

Marcy and his ministers


The ostend manifesto1

The Ostend Manifesto

  • The ministers advised the United States to take Cuba by force if need be.

  • Pierce and Marcy claimed to not want anything to do with this, but Pierce was now labeled as pro-slavery and a war-like expansionist.

  • The Ostend Manifesto firmly identified slavery with expansion.

William L. Marcy


The kansas nebraska act

The Kansas-Nebraska Act

  • Keeping the question of slavery out of congress was the only hope for the success of the Compromise of 1850.

  • Senator Stephen A. Douglas, architect of the Compromise of 1850, was the man to revive the slavery issue in Congress.

  • The American dream was to build a railway from the East to the West.

  • Only organized and surveyed land would be included because government grants controlled the railways.

Stephen Douglas


The kansas nebraska act1

The Kansas-Nebraska Act

  • Douglas introduced a bill providing for Kansas and Nebraska Territory.

  • Southerners would not want a bill passed for anti-slavery states, and Douglas needed their votes.


The kansas nebraska act2

The Kansas-Nebraska Act

  • To win their support, Douglas made two provisions.

    • Missouri Compromise of 1820 would be updated to Compromise of 1850

    • Popular Soverigntywould decide whether the two new states were free or slave states. (Kansas and Nebraska)


The kansas nebraska act3

The Kansas-Nebraska Act

  • He knew the promise would cause problems, but he felt he needed southern votes and Pierce could help him.

  • In 1854 Douglas managed to have his Kansas-Nebraska bill passed.

  • Southerners were happy, but Northerners held protests, transforming the question of slavery into a battle over the spread of slavery to new territories.


Expansion and slavery

Expansion and Slavery

  • The Congressionalbattle over slavery was about where it did not exist and might never go.

  • Northerners did not want the expansion of slavery or to live near and compete with blacks.

  • Several Midwestern states banned blacks.

  • Southerners felt it was an attempt to bar them and their property from territories.

  • The thought the north was trying

    to prevent them from growing.


The new republican party

The New Republican Party

  • In the North, the Kansas-Nebraska bill was greeted by anger. Parties were formed to resist slavery expansion.

  • July 6, 1854, two new parties were founded. One new party was the Republicanparty, who took their platform against slavery, the Kansas-Nebraska Act, and the Fugitive Slave Act.

  • Congressional electionsin November 1854 produced a revolution in American politics.

1795

1851-1852 ((Whigs vs. Democrats))

1854 ((Know Nothing & Republicans vs. Weakened Democrats))

1860s – North vs. South


The new republican party1

The New Republican Party

  • The Old Whig Party was shattered and members joined other parties.

  • The Democratic Party staggerbut did not collapse.

  • In 1852 Democrats were a substantial part of Congress, but in 1854 there were only 83Democrats and 108Republicans.


The know nothing party

The Know-Nothing Party

  • The other 43 representatives of Congress in 1854 were members of the new Know Nothing Party.

  • Know-Nothings were a reaction to the flood of immigrants.

  • The Party grew out of the Order of the Star-Spangled Banner, a secret association formed in 1849.

  • Its real name was the AmericanParty.


The know nothing party1

The Know-Nothing Party

  • The group seeks refuge in hate and prejudicerather than real issues of their day.

  • Together, Republicans and Know-Nothings won enough seats to control Congress.

  • It was hard to tell Republicans and Know-Nothings apart, especially when a majority were both.


Bleeding kansas

Bleeding Kansas

  • Douglas thought slavery troubles were banished from Congressto the west.

  • The Kansas-Nebraska Act did bring blood-shedto Kansas.

  • Popular sovereignty did not say when a territory could decide about slavery.


Bleeding kansas1

Bleeding Kansas

  • The Northerners and Southerners raced to the territory to be the first to decide the fate of the land.

  • Antislavery New Englanders raised money to rush emigrants to Kansas.

  • They used guns to fight for popular sovereignty rather than votes.


Bleeding kansas2

Bleeding Kansas

  • Violence in Kansas was inevitable but the situation became critical only twice.

  • In May 1856 a proslavery sheriff led a mob into antislavery Lawrence, sacking and burning the town.

  • Antislavery messiah John Brown led a party including his four sons to a Pottawatomie Creek settlement. They split the men’s skulls there and killed them.

  • Somehow Kansas avoided becoming a territory of total anarchyand civil war.

Antislavery messiah John Brown


Charles sumner is attacked

Charles Sumner is Attacked

  • Charles Sumner delivered a speech called “The Crime Against Kansas” to the Senate using insultingwords to attack the south.

  • Preston S. Brooks of South Carolina was a nephew of a senator and avenged this hate on May 22, 1856 by beating Sumner at his desk with a cane.

  • Brooks resigned and was reelected. He became a southern hero.

  • Sumner became a Northern martyrand never regained his health.

  • Before his return, the empty seat proclaimed northern and southern leaders were no longer on speaking terms.

Brooks beats Sumner with a cane


Quote

Quote

  • “Did John Brown fail? John Brown began the war that ended American Slavery and made this a free republic. His zeal in the cause of freedom was infinitely superior to mine. Mine was as the taper light; his was as the burning sun.’ I could live for the slave, John Brown could die for them.” – Frederick Douglass


  • Login