how the compromise collapsed
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
How the Compromise Collapsed

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 20

How the Compromise Collapsed - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

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.

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'How the Compromise Collapsed' - glen

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.


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

  • “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