Renewing the Sectional Struggle

The Divide Between North and South Widens

As the United States continued to grow, several important events occurred that expanded the nation and the sectional divide over slavery. The key issue became whether or not slavery should be allowed in the territory acquired in the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo.

In the wake of the discovery of gold in California, thousands of immigrants and Americans flowed into the western territories. This accelerated discussions over slavery and created a clear sectional divide between Northern Abolitionists and Southern Fire Eaters. 

A new political party, the Free Soil Party, developed to challenge the Whigs and Democrats. The Free Soilers’ primary goal was to keep slavery from expanding into the new American West.

The rapid population growth in California led its political leaders to write a state constitution and petition Congress for statehood. The California Constitution did not allow slavery, making it a potential Free Soil State. Naturally, Abolitionists supported the measure, while Fire Eaters opposed it. Tensions escalated further due to a dispute between Texas and the Federal Government over territory in New Mexico and the role of Northerners, including the Underground Railroad, in aiding escaped slaves.

The Compromise of 1850 temporarily eased the sectional divide by adding California to the Union as a Free State and implementing an updated version of the Fugitive Slave Act. However, the act increased support for the Abolition Movement and led Southerners to look for territory where new Slave States could be established, primarily in the Caribbean and Central America.

In 1853, the Gadsden Purchase finalized the acquisition of the territory in the continental United States and paved the way for a southern route for a new railroad.

A year later, in 1854, Stephen Douglas of Illinois devised the Kansas-Nebraska Act to capitalize on “Kansas Fever” and allow Americans to settle a significant portion of the Louisiana Purchase. The passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Act significantly impacted the landscape of American expansion and politics in the latter half of the 1850s and led directly to the violent border war known as “Bleeding Kansas.” It also ignited the political aspirations of a former congressman from Illinois named Abraham Lincoln.

Unrest After the Mexican-American War

• In 1848, there was political and social unrest in America, partially influenced by European revolutions.
• The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo ended the Mexican-American War.
• Mexico gave up a large amount of land, including California.
• This land acquisition sparked renewed debate over the expansion of slavery.
• The Wilmot Proviso, proposed by Northern anti-slavery advocates, aimed to ban slavery in new territories gained in the Mexican Cession.
• Southern senators blocked the Wilmot Proviso.
• The ongoing debate over slavery started to divide Whigs and Democrats, increasing the sectional conflict between North and South.

AHC Note — The Revolutions of 1848 were uprisings that swept through Europe. Driven by the lower classes, they sought to replace traditional monarchies with democratic Nation-States. The revolutions grew out of rising nationalism, mass starvation, and migration caused by civil unrest in the wake of the European Potato Failure. The first revolution occurred in Italy in 1848. The revolutions in the German States were a series of loosely coordinated protests and uprisings that occurred in Baden, Austria, and Prussia. The Revolutions failed, leading to the establishment of the German Confederation in 1850. Afterward, the leaders went into exile, and many of them fled to the United States.

The Popular Sovereignty Panacea

Political Parties and the Slavery Issue

• The Whigs and Democrats were important to national unity and had strong support in the North and the South.
• Replacing them with sectional parties would threaten the Union.
• Many politicians believed avoiding the slavery issue was the best strategy.
• However, it remained a constant source of tension.
• Northern Abolitionists and Southern Fire Eaters continued to stir up agitation and conflict.

The 1848 Democratic National Convention

• In 1848, Democrats needed a new candidate.
• President James K. Polk committed to serving only one term.
• The Democratic National Convention selected General Lewis Cass.
• Cass was a veteran of the War of 1812 and had extensive experience as a Senator and diplomat.
• Cass was perceived as somewhat pompous and was mocked with nicknames like “General Gass” and comparisons to a jackass.
• The Democratic platform did not address the issue of slavery in new territories.

AHC Note — Lewis Cass was a longtime politician from Michigan. As Governor of the Michigan Territory, he worked with John Jacob Astor and the American Fur Company to undermine the Fur Trade Factory System, allowing the trade of alcohol to Native American Indians. Cass and Thomas Hart Benton eventually helped end the Factory System in 1822.

Lewis Cass and Popular Sovereignty

• Cass was known for his views on slavery extension.
• He was associated with the doctrine of “Popular Sovereignty.”
• Popular Sovereignty meant that the people of a territory should decide the status of slavery.
• This doctrine was based on the principles of the Constitution.

Appeal and Flaws of Popular Sovereignty

• Popular Sovereignty appealed to the public due to its alignment with democratic self-determination.
• Politicians favored it as a compromise between banning slavery and protecting it in the territories.
• The principle shifted the decision on slavery to the people in each territory.
• Advocates hoped this would turn the national issue of slavery into local issues.
• However, Popular Sovereignty had a major flaw — it could lead to the expansion of slavery.

Political Triumphs for General Taylor

The Whig Nomination of Zachary Taylor

• The Whigs held their national convention in Philadelphia.
• They nominated Zachary Taylor, known as the “Hero of Buena Vista.”
• Taylor was noted for his honesty and had never held a civil office or voted for President.
• Henry Clay, a key figure in the Whig Party, was expected to be the nominee.
• Clay was passed over due to his numerous political enemies.

The Whig Platform and Taylor’s Stance

• The Whigs avoided addressing controversial issues in their platform.
• They focused on promoting the virtues of their candidate.
• Zachary Taylor did not publicly commit to a position on the extension of slavery.
• Taylor was a wealthy Louisiana plantation owner with many slaves.

Formation and Platform of the Free Soil Party

• Northern anti-slavery activists created the Free Soil Party out of distrust for Cass and Taylor.
• The Free Soil Party strongly supported the Wilmot Proviso, which would ban slavery in the new territories.
• The party went further by advocating federal aid for internal improvements.
• They also promoted free government land for settlers.

AHC Note — The Free Soil Party was a coalition of Free Soil Democrats, Barnburners, Conscience Whigs, and members of the Liberty Party that strongly opposed the extension of slavery in the American West during the 1840s and 1850s.

Composition and Ideals of the Free Soil Party

• The Free Soil Party attracted a diverse group of supporters.
• It included industrialists unhappy with Polk’s reduction of protective tariffs.
• Democrats dissatisfied with Polk’s Oregon and Texas decisions joined the party.
• Some northern members were more opposed to blacks than to slavery itself.
• It included “Conscience Whigs,” who condemned slavery on moral grounds.
• The slogan was: “Free soil, free speech, free labor, and free men.”
• It argued that slavery hindered the upward mobility of free white workers.
• Free Soilers believed free land in the West was essential to maintaining American economic opportunities.
• The Free Soil Party was an early example of a sectional political organization focused on slavery, paving the way for the Republican Party’s formation.

AHC Note — The Free Soilers held their convention in Buffalo, New York, starting on August 9, 1848. Delegates came from all the northern states and three southern states (Maryland, Delaware, and Virginia). Key attendees were civil rights activist and former slave Frederick Douglass, journalist and poet Walt Whitman, and abolitionist leader Joshua Giddings of Ohio. Salmon Chase (Ohio), Preston King (New York), and Benjamin Franklin Butler (Massachusetts) drafted the party’s political platform. Martin Van Buren, the former President, was selected as the party’s Presidential candidate.

The 1848 Presidential Election and Its Outcome

• The major parties avoided the slavery issue and focused on personal attacks during their campaigns.
• Zachary Taylor, an amateur in politics, needed careful management to avoid damaging his reputation.
• Taylor’s supporters portrayed him as a hero with the slogan “General Taylor never surrenders.”
• Taylor’s popularity from his military service helped him win the election.
• Taylor (Whig) received 1,360,967 popular votes and 163 electoral votes.
• Lewis Cass (Democrat) received 1,222,342 popular votes and 127 electoral votes.
• Martin Van Buren (Free Soil) received 291,263 votes but did not win any electoral votes.
• Van Buren’s presence likely diverted votes from Cass in New York to help Taylor win.

“Californy Gold’’

Zachary Taylor and the California Gold Discovery

• President Zachary Taylor was inexperienced in politics.
• He struggled with political issues, especially those concerning slavery.
• The discovery of gold in California in early 1848 intensified the slavery debate.
• This development made it difficult for Taylor to avoid addressing the issue of slavery in new territories.

AHC Note — James W. Marshall discovered gold on January 24, 1848, while working at Sutter’s Mill in the Sacramento Valley. The discovery came just ten days after the United States officially acquired California in the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. President Polk announced the discovery in December 1848. Americans living on the East Coast started moving West in search of their fortunes. They loaded their wagons and crossed the Oregon Trail, California Trail, and others as they made their way to California. These people became known as “The 49ers.” The journey west was difficult, and a group lost their way in Death Valley (see The Lost 49ers).

The California Gold Rush

• People flooded into California in search of gold.
• Miners eagerly searched for gold. Some struck it rich, but many failed and suffered physical hardships.
• Those who did well were often service providers who charged high rates for laundry and other services.
• Some laundry was even sent to the Hawaiian Islands to meet the high demand.

Chaos in California

• The sudden arrival of thousands of people overwhelmed California’s minimal government.
• Many newcomers were lawless individuals, often accompanied by women with questionable morals.
• The influx of criminals and outcasts led to a rise in crime, including robbery, claim jumping, and murder.
• Violence was only partially controlled by rough vigilante justice.
• In San Francisco, between 1848 and 1856, numerous killings occurred, but only three semi-legal hangings were carried out.

AHC Note — News of the discovery spread worldwide, attracting people from places accessible by boat, such as Oregon, Hawaii, Mexico, Chile, Peru, and China, even before the news reached the East Coast of the United States. The non-native population reached nearly 100,000 by the end of 1849, compared to just 1,000 before the Gold Rush.

California Statehood and Southern Opposition

• California worked to establish a state government.
• In 1848, Political leaders drafted a constitution that prohibited slavery.
• California applied directly to Congress for admission, skipping the territorial stage.
• This bypassed Southern congressmen who wanted to prevent the spread of Free Soil.
• Southern politicians opposed the application, fearing it would disrupt the balance and unity of the Union.
• There was concern that California’s admission might intensify sectional tensions and threaten the Union.

AHC Note — President Taylor died unexpectedly on July 9, 1850. His successor, Millard Fillmore, a New York Whig, was open to compromise to ensure the Union could continue, with the addition of California as a Free State. Illinois Senator Stephen Douglas emerged as the leader of a moderate faction in Congress that supported compromise.

Sectional Balance and the Underground Railroad

The South’s Political Strength in 1850

• In 1850, the South was relatively prosperous and influential.
• The South had significant leadership positions, including President Taylor.
• The South held a majority in the cabinet and on the Supreme Court.
• Although outnumbered in the House, the South had equal representation in the Senate, allowing it to counter Northern actions.
• Southern cotton production was growing, and cotton prices were high and profitable.
• Both Northern and Southern observers believed that slavery was not seriously threatened in the South.
• The 15 Slave States could veto any proposed Constitutional Amendments.

Southern Concerns Over Political Balance in 1850

• The South was anxious about the shifting political balance between the Slave States and the Free States.
• At the time, there were 15 of each.
• The admission of California threatened to disrupt the balance in the Senate.
• There was concern that the available land for potential slave states was running out.
• There were movements in New Mexico and Utah for admission as Free States.
• The outcome for California could set a precedent for the Mexican Cession territory.

Territorial Dispute with Texas

• Texas claimed a large area extending east of the Rio Grande and north to the 42nd Parallel.
• This area included part of present-day New Mexico.
• The federal government proposed to separate this land from Texas.
• Texans threatened to seize Santa Fe, which they believed was their rightful territory.
• The escalating dispute raised the possibility of violent conflict.

Southern Concerns Over Abolition Agitation

• Many Southerners were upset by the ongoing Northern efforts to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia.
• They were alarmed by the idea of Free Soil territory located between slaveholding Maryland and Virginia.

The Underground Railroad

• The South was troubled by the escape of runaway slaves, aided by the Underground Railroad.
• It was an informal network of “stations” (anti-slavery homes) that helped slaves escape.
• “Conductors” guided “passengers” (runaway slaves) from the Slave States to freedom in the North.
• It undermined Southern efforts to control slavery and recover escaped slaves.

Harriet Tubman and the Underground Railroad

• Harriet Tubman, an illiterate runaway slave from Maryland, was one of the most notable conductors of the Underground Railroad.
• Tubman made 19 trips into the South and rescued over 300 slaves, including her parents.
• She earned the nickname “Moses” for her bravery and success.
• While some aspects of the Underground Railroad were later exaggerated, its existence and impact were real.

Demand for a Stricter Fugitive-Slave Law

• By 1850, Southerners called for a stricter fugitive-slave law due to inadequacies in the 1793 law.
• The old law was ineffective because state authorities often failed to cooperate.
• Unlike cattle thieves, Abolitionists involved in the Underground Railroad did not gain personally from their actions.
• The loss of slaves was frustrating to slaveowners.
• The moral stance of Abolitionists was seen as more irritating than theft.

Losses and Principles Regarding Runaway Slaves

• By 1850, the South estimated a loss of about 1,000 runaway slaves per year from a total of around 4 million slaves.
• Some gained freedom through self-purchase or voluntary emancipation rather than through escape.
• For slaveholders, the principle of losing slaves was more significant than the financial loss.
• Southern arguments were based on the Constitution’s protection of slavery and Congressional laws for slave-catching.
• James M. Mason, a U.S. Senator from Virginia, said, “…although the loss of property is felt, the loss of honor is felt still more.”

AHC Notes — Some states in the North passed “Personal Liberty Laws.” These local laws allowed citizens to refuse to comply with the provisions of the Fugitive Slave Act. This tactic avoided the controversial issue path of a state “nullifying” Federal laws.

Twilight of the Senatorial Giants

The Great Triumvirate

• Congress faced a critical situation with California seeking admission as a free state.
• Southern Fire Eaters threatened secession if their demands were not met.
• The crisis brought together a distinguished group of statesmen, including the “Old Guard” and emerging leaders.
• The prominent figures of the time — Henry Clay, John C. Calhoun, and Daniel Webster — appeared together for the last time on the public stage.

AHC Note — Clay, Calhoun, and Webster are often called the “Great Triumvirate.”

Henry Clay and the Compromise Efforts

• At 73, Henry Clay, the “Great Pacificator,” played a key role in negotiating compromises in the Senate.
• Clay proposed and defended a series of compromises to address the crisis.
• He was supported by Senator Stephen A. Douglas of Illinois, known as the “Little Giant” because he stood 5 feet 4 inches.
• Douglas’s role was less prominent but crucial in the negotiation process.
• Clay advocated for concessions from the North and South, including a more practical Fugitive Slave Law.

John C. Calhoun’s Final Speech

• Senator John C. Calhoun, 68 years old and dying of tuberculosis, made his last formal speech from the Senate chamber.
• The speech was read by a younger colleague while Calhoun remained seated.
• While Calhoun supported the intent of Clay’s proposed compromises, he felt they lacked sufficient safeguards.
• His appeal included demands to leave slavery unchanged, ensure the return of runaway slaves, protect Southern minority rights, and restore political balance.
• Calhoun also proposed two Presidents — one from the North and one from the South — each with veto power.

Calhoun’s Death and Legacy

• Calhoun died in 1850 before the debate ended.
• Expressing concern for the South, he said, “The South! The South! God knows what will become of her!”
• In Charleston, a monument was erected in his honor, inscribed with “Truth, Justice, and the Constitution.”
• Although Calhoun sought to preserve the Union and uphold the Constitution, his proposals nearly jeopardized both.

Daniel Webster’s Seventh of March Speech

• Daniel Webster, aged 68 and suffering from a liver condition, gave his last significant speech in the Senate on March 7, 1850..
• Webster spoke for three hours before a packed audience.
• He supported Henry Clay’s compromise measures and advocated for significant concessions to the South.
• Webster emphasized the need for a stronger Fugitive Slave Law as part of the compromise.
• Webster questioned the need for legislation on slavery in the territories, arguing it was unnecessary.
• He claimed that “Almighty God” had already decreed, through climate, topography, and geography, that a plantation and slave economy could not thrive in the American West.
• Webster concluded that only compromise, concession, and reasonableness would resolve the issue.
• The speech helped shift Northern opinion toward compromise.
• The demand for printed copies was so high that Webster distributed over 100,000 copies, noting that even 200,000 would not meet the demand.
• The speech bolstered Union sentiment, particularly among banking and commercial centers in the North.
• In appreciation, a prominent Washington banker canceled $5,000 in notes owed by Webster and sent him a personal check for $1,000 along with a congratulatory message.

Reactions to Webster’s Seventh of March Speech

• Abolitionists, who had previously seen Webster as an ally, criticized him harshly, comparing him to Benedict Arnold.
• These criticisms were deemed unfair, as Webster had always viewed slavery as evil but considered disunion worse.
• He had consistently held disdain for Abolitionists and never aligned himself with their cause.

AHC Note — Despite accolades, Webster’s speech shocked New England Abolitionists. Some accused Webster of making a deal with Southerners.

Horace Mann said it was a “…vile catastrophe…” and Webster was “…a fallen star! Lucifer descending from Heaven!”

Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote, “‘Liberty! Liberty!’ Pho! Let Mr. Webster, for decency’s sake shut his lips for once and forever on this word. The word ‘Liberty’ in the mouth of Mr. Webster sounds like the word ‘love’ in the mouth of a courtesan.” The speech damaged Webster’s reputation and he resigned from the Senate.

Years later, James G. Blaine defended Webster in his memoirs. He wrote:

“Mr. Webster had in his own lifetime seen the thirteen colonies grow into thirty powerful States. He had seen three millions of people, enfeebled and impoverished by a long struggle, increased eightfold in number, surrounded by all the comforts, charms, and securities of life. All this spoke to him of the Union and of its priceless blessings. He now heard its advantages discussed, its perpetuity doubted, its existence threatened…Mr. Webster felt that a generation had been born who were undervaluing their inheritance, and who might, by temerity, destroy it. Under motives inspired by these surroundings, he spoke for the preservation of the Union.”

Compromise of 1850

• Concessions to the North:
  • California was admitted to the Union as a Free State
  • Abolition of the slave trade (but not slavery) in the District of Columbia
• Concessions to the South:
  • The remainder of the Mexican Cession area, to be formed into the territories of New Mexico and Utah, was open to Popular Sovereignty
  • Texas received $10 million from the Federal Government as compensation for the disputed territory with New Mexico
  • A more stringent Fugitive Slave Act was agreed to.

AHC Note — Moderates celebrated the legislation, believing it had saved the Union. President Fillmore proclaimed a “final settlement” to the sectional divide over slavery. Extremists on both sides of the debate were not so easily convinced. Free Soil Senator Salmon P. Chase of Ohio could have been speaking for both sides when he guardedly observed, “the question of slavery in the territories has been avoided. It has not been settled.”

Deadlock and Danger on Capitol Hill

The Young Guard’s Role in the 1850 Debate

• The congressional debate continued, with the “Young Guard” from the North had not spoken.
• They were leaders who had not been deeply involved in the Union’s formation.
• Unlike the older generation, they were more focused on reforming and improving the Union rather than merely preserving it.

William H. Seward

• William H. Seward, a freshman Senator from New York, was a leading voice.
• He was a strong opponent of slavery and firmly rejected the idea of compromise.
• Seward did not fully appreciate that previous compromises had kept the Union together, and that lack of compromise could lead to a separation of the sections.
• Seward argued that Christian legislators must adhere to God’s law (a higher moral law) in addition to human laws (the U.S. Constitution).
• His stance may have negatively impacted his chances for the presidential nomination and the presidency in 1860.

President Taylor’s Stance During the 1850 Debate

• President Taylor seemed inclined to veto any compromise passed by Congress.
• Influenced by figures like Seward, Taylor’s military resolve was stirred by Texas’s threats to seize Santa Fe.
• Taylor appeared ready to take strong measures, potentially leading an army against Texas and punishing dissenters.
• Had military action begun, it could have prompted the South to defend Texas, possibly leading to the outbreak of the Civil War in 1850.

AHC Note — In August 1850, Secretary of War Winfield Scott sent a message to the Governor of the Mexico Territory, John Munroe. It said:

“You are hereby instructed, in the case of any military invasion of New Mexico from Texas, or by armed men from any other State or states for the purpose of overturning the order of civil government that may exist in New Mexico at the time, or of subjugating New Mexico to Texas, to interpose, as far practicable, the troops under your command against any such act of violence.”

Breaking the Congressional Logjam

President Taylor’s Death and Fillmore’s Role

• President Taylor died suddenly in 1850, likely from an acute intestinal disorder.
• Vice President Millard Fillmore, a conciliatory New York lawyer-politician, succeeded him.
• Fillmore, having been impressed by the arguments for compromise, signed the series of compromise measures that Congress passed after seven months of debate.
• The Compromise of 1850 required a delicate balancing of interests.

AHC Note — President Fillmore signed the separate bills into law between September 9 and September 20, 1850.

Acceptance of the Compromise Measures

• The effort to gain national acceptance of the Compromise of 1850 was intense.
• In the North, “Union savers” like Senators Clay, Webster, and Douglas supported the compromise.
• Henry Clay gave over 70 speeches promoting the compromise.
• Public sentiment in the North gradually shifted in favor of the compromise.
• This shift was fueled by relief and increased prosperity from the California Gold Rush.

Southern Opposition and Resolution

• Southern opposition to the Compromise of 1850 remained strong, particularly from the Fire Eaters.
• A South Carolina newspaper expressed hostility toward the Union and the North.
• A movement in the South to boycott northern goods gained traction.
• However, southern Unionists, supported by economic prosperity, eventually prevailed, and the boycott did not happen.

The Nashville Convention

• In mid-1850, southern extremists gathered in Nashville, Tennessee, near Andrew Jackson’s burial site.
• The delegates supported slavery and condemned the compromise bills.
• When the convention reconvened later in the year, after the compromise bills had passed, it proved ineffective.
• By then, southern opinion had largely accepted the Congressional decisions.

AHC Note — The Nashville Convention was held from June 3 to 11, 1850. During the meetings, the delegates considered secession if slavery was banned in the new western territories. Jefferson Davis was prominent in the pro-secession faction, while Sam Houston supported the Union. After the Compromise of 1850 was passed, some delegates met again in Nashville. Pro-secession politicians dominated these meetings. They did not vote in favor of secession, but they did resolve that they had the right to secede and condemned the Compromise of 1850.

Second Era of Good Feelings

• After the Compromise of 1850, a brief period of calm, known as a “Second Era of Good Feelings,” emerged.
• Discussions of secession diminished, and many in both the North and South hoped the compromises would be final.
• There was a general desire to put the divisive issue of slavery to rest.
• However, this period of peace was short-lived, as tensions soon resurfaced.

Balancing the Compromise Scales

Free Soil and the Compromise of 1850

• California was admitted as a free state, tipping the Senate in favor of the North.
• The territories of New Mexico and Utah were open to slavery based on Popular Sovereignty, but it was unlikely either would approve it. This included the territory ceded by Texas.

Slavery and the Compromise of 1850

• The South did not gain additional slave territories to restore the “sacred balance.”
• The inability to expand slavery into the new territories was a setback for the South.
• Southerners looked to the Caribbean as a potential solution for acquiring new slave territories.
• Texas received $10 million to help with its debt, but this was relatively modest compared to the vast area ceded.
• The compromise stopped immediate abolition in the District of Columbia but only temporarily; the prohibition of the Slave Trade in the District was seen as a step toward Emancipation.

The Controversial Fugitive Slave Law of 1850

• The new law created legal disadvantages for runaways. Escaped slaves were not allowed to testify in their defense and were denied a jury trial.
• Federal commissioners were paid five dollars if a runaway was freed and ten dollars if they were returned to slavery. Many people viewed these incentives as corrupt.
• People who assisted escaped slaves faced heavy fines, jail time, and the possibility of being forced to help in slave-catching.

Anthony Burns and the Boston Slave Riot

Support for the Abolition Movement increased in the North. Massachusetts Senator Charles Sumner declared the new Fugitive Slave Act was “a flagrant violation of the Constitution, and of the most cherished of human rights—shocking to Christian sentiments, insulting to humanity, and impudent in all its pretentions.”

Anthony Burns (1834–1862) was born into slavery in Virginia. In early 1854, he escaped to Boston. His owner, Charles F. Suttle, traveled to Boston, where he had Burns arrested and demanded that he be returned to his plantation under the provisions of the Fugitive Slave Act. 

As the court was preparing to return Burns to Settle, Richard Henry Dana Jr., a lawyer and prominent Abolitionist, intervened and offered to represent Burns. What followed in May 1850 was nine days of courtroom drama and a failed attempt by Abolitionists to break Burns out of jail and free him. 

Ultimately, the court ordered Burns to be returned to Virginia. It took more than 1,500 troops to ensure an angry mob did not seize him and free him while he was escorted to the boat.  When he returned to Virginia, he was held in prison for roughly four months. During that time, he was permanently crippled and suffered from poor health.

Burns’ freedom was purchased for $1,300 by a Baptist minister, Leonard Grimes, an African American who had been born free in Virginia. Afterward, Burns traveled to Ohio, where he studied at Oberlin College. He suffered from poor health for the rest of his life and died from consumption on July 27, 1862.

Less than two months later, on July 2, 1854, William Lloyd Garrison burned a copy of the Constitution at an anti-slavery rally, declaring, “The Constitution of the United States of America is the source and parent of all the other atrocities — a covenant with death, and an agreement with Hell.”

Abolitionist Response to the Fugitive Slave Act

• The Underground Railroad increased its efforts, with northern mobs actively rescuing escaped slaves from their pursuers.
• Massachusetts passed legislation making it a crime for state officials to enforce the Fugitive Slave Law.
• Other states enacted Personal Liberty Laws to obstruct federal enforcement, such as denying local jails to federal authorities.
• Abolitionists condemned the law, with William Lloyd Garrison leading a meeting in 1851 that denounced the new law by saying, “We execrate it, we spit upon it, we trample it under our feet.”

Impact of the Fugitive Slave Act on North-South Relations

• The Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 intensified the Abolitionist Movement, especially in the North.
• Southerners were angered by the failure of Northerners to enforce the law and argued Personal Liberty Laws were unconstitutional.

The Possibility of Civil War in 1850

• From the viewpoint of Southern Secessionists, engaging in conflict in 1850 might have seemed advantageous; however, they would have faced a coalition of states that were increasingly dominating in terms of population, wealth, and industrial capacity.
• For Unionists, postponing war was preferable as the North was gaining strength and advancing rapidly in terms of economy and infrastructure.

Defeat and Doom for the Whigs

Franklin Pierce, Democratic Nominee for the 1852 Election

• The Democratic convention of 1852 in Baltimore faced a deadlock.
• The convention eventually turned to Franklin Pierce, an unremarkable lawyer-politician from New Hampshire, as a compromise candidate.
• The Whigs ridiculed Pierce with the question, “Who is Franklin Pierce?”
• The Democrats called him “Young Hickory of the Granite Hills,” comparing him to Andrew Jackson, who was known as “Old Hickory.”
• He was young, handsome, and carried himself with military bearing, but was often seen as weak and indecisive.
• Known for his friendly nature and fondness for social activities, he was nicknamed the “Fainting General” due to rumors of alcohol use.
• Pierce served in the Mexican-American War but suffered several embarrassments, including a fall from a horse and a bout with diarrhea.
• Although he was from the North, he was acceptable to the pro-slavery faction of the Democratic Party, even though he supported the Compromise of 1850.

Winfield Scott, Whig Nominee for the 1852 Election

• The Whigs had an opportunity to leverage their achievements, particularly the Compromise of 1850.
• They could have nominated President Millard Fillmore or Senator Daniel Webster, who were both linked to the compromise.
• The Whigs chose Winfield Scott, the war hero known as “Old Fuss and Feathers.”
• Scott was impressive but was perceived as arrogant, which alienated many voters.
• The Whigs endorsed the Compromise of 1850 but with less enthusiasm than the Democrats.

1852 Presidential Campaign

• The campaign focused on personal attacks rather than issues.
• Democrats mocked Scott’s arrogance.
• Whigs criticized Pierce’s alleged issues with alcohol.
• Democrats used the slogan, “We Polked ’em in ’44; we’ll Pierce ’em in ’52.”

Division in the Whig Party

• The Whig party became divided.
• Northern anti-slavery Whigs accepted Scott as their candidate but opposed supporting the Fugitive Slave Law.
• They said, “We accept the candidate but spit on the platform.”
• Southern Whigs were skeptical of Scott’s commitment to the Compromise of 1850 and the Fugitive Slave Law.
• Southern Whigs accepted the platform but rejected Scott as the candidate.
• Over 5,000 Georgia Whigs, who were committed to the finality of the Compromise, voted for Daniel Webster even though he had died nearly two weeks before the Presidential Election of 1852.

Pierce Wins the Presidential Election of 1852

• Pierce won the presidential election by a large margin in the Electoral College, with 254 votes to Scott’s 42.
• The popular vote was closer: Pierce received 1,601,117 votes, and Scott received 1,385,453 votes.

Significance of the 1852 Election

• The election of 1852 signaled the end of the Whig Party, which started to collapse over the issue of slavery.
• This foreshadowed the rise of sectional politics rather than national political alignments.
• The Whigs only won two presidential elections — William Henry Harrison (1840) and Zachary Taylor 1848) — both war heroes.
• The party struggled with the Fugitive Slave Law and could not reconcile the differences.
• The Whigs contributed to the preservation of the Union through their political strength in the South and leaders like Henry Clay and Daniel Webster.
• Clay and Webster died during the 1852 campaign, but their efforts helped sustain a united United States.

President Pierce, the Expansionist

The Pierce Administration

• President Pierce began his term with energy and confidence, delivering his 3,000-word inaugural address from memory.
• His cabinet featured assertive southerners, including Jefferson Davis, who was appointed Secretary of War.
• The southern states were eager to expand their slave territory, and Pierce was willing to support these ambitions.

Expansion and Interest in Central America

• The successes of the Mexican-American War boosted the appeal of Manifest Destiny.
• The acquisition of land along the Pacific Coast and the discovery of gold increased interest in Central America.
• Key areas of interest included Panama and Nicaragua, as well as potential canal routes and nearby islands, such as Cuba, which was still under Spanish control.

Ambitions of the “Slavocrats” and Expansionist Toast

• After the Compromise of 1850 limited new territories for slavery, Southern expansionists, or “slavocrats,” looked for new territories where slavery could be established.
• In 1856, a Texan proposed a toast, saying, “To the Southern republic bounded on the north by the Mason and Dixon line and on the South by the Isthmus of Tehuantepec [southern Mexico], including Cuba and all other lands on our Southern shore.”

Southern Interest in Nicaragua and William Walker’s Adventure

• Southerners were particularly interested in Nicaragua.
• William Walker, an American adventurer, tried to take control of Nicaragua, having previously tried to seize Baja California from Mexico.
• Supported by an armed force mainly from the South, Walker became President of Nicaragua in July 1856 and legalized slavery.
• A Southern newspaper praised Walker as the “gray-eyed man of destiny,” offering Nicaragua to Southern slaveholders.
• Central American nations united to defeat Walker.
• President Pierce withdrew U.S. diplomatic recognition, and Walker was executed by a Honduran firing squad in 1860.

AHC Note — The “Walker Affair” — also known as the “Filibuster War” — was the result of Walker’s Invasion of Nicaragua in 1855.

British and American Interests in Nicaragua

• Nicaragua was crucial to both Great Britain and the United States due to its strategic location for trade and canal routes.
• Great Britain, concerned about American monopolization, established a foothold at Greytown on the eastern end of the proposed canal route.
• This challenged the Monroe Doctrine and raised the possibility of war between the U.S. and Britain.
• The Clayton-Bulwer Treaty of 1850 resolved the crisis by agreeing that neither country would fortify or have exclusive control over any future canal in Nicaragua.
• While the treaty was essential to prevent British dominance at the time, it created problems for American canal projects in Central America.

America’s Growing Interest in Asia

• The acquisition of California and Oregon made America a Pacific power, boosting trade prospects with Asia.
• Americans had established connections with China and were seeking to expand commercial relations with Japan.
• Japan had been isolated for over 200 years, maintaining strict isolationism and prohibiting foreign sailors from leaving.
• The Japanese were also reluctant to readmit their sailors who had ended up on the North American West Coast.
• By 1853, Japan was prepared to open up due to the threat posed by Russia.

Opening Japan to the West

• The U.S. government aimed to open trade with Japan and dispatched Commodore Matthew C. Perry, who commanded a fleet of powerful warships.
• Perry, the brother of Oliver Hazard Perry, used a combination of force and diplomacy to negotiate with Japan.
• In 1854, Perry succeeded in signing a treaty with Japan, starting a significant relationship between Japan and the Western World.
• The treaty allowed limited commercial access but was a key step toward ending Japan’s isolation.

Coveted Cuba: Pearl of the Antilles

The Quest for Cuba

• Cuba became a target of American expansion in the 1850s.
• The South saw Cuba as a prime candidate for new slave territory due to its sugar plantations.
• Cuba could be divided into several states, which would help restore the political balance in the Senate.
• Cuba was the most significant remnant of Spain’s New World empire.
• President Polk offered $100 million to buy Cuba, but Spain rejected the offer.
• With the purchase off the table, some believed that seizing Cuba was the only viable option for acquisition.

Filibustering Expeditions to Cuba

• During 1850–1851, two “filibustering” expeditions from the South tried to invade Cuba, aiming to claim it for the U.S.
• These expeditions were unsuccessful.
• The second expedition ended in tragedy, with the leader and fifty followers executed.
• The execution led to outrage among Southerners and led to a mob attacking Spain’s consulate in New Orleans.

The Black Warrior Incident

• In 1854, Spanish officials in Cuba seized the American steamer Black Warrior on a technicality, escalating tensions.
• President Pierce considered provoking a war with Spain to seize Cuba.
• At the time, major European powers (England, France, and Russia) were engaged in the Crimean War, limiting their ability to support Spain.

The Ostend Manifesto

• American ministers in Spain, England, and France were directed to draft confidential recommendations for acquiring Cuba.
• They initially met in Ostend, Belgium, to create the Ostend Manifesto.
• The manifesto proposed offering Spain $120 million for Cuba.
• It stated that if Spain refused or if its control of Cuba threatened American interests, the U.S. would be justified in seizing the island.
• The Ostend Manifesto was leaked to the public.
• Northern Free Soilers, already upset by the Fugitive Slave Act and other pro-slavery measures, condemned it as a “manifesto of brigands.”
• The backlash forced the Pierce administration to abandon plans for acquiring Cuba.

Deadlock in Territorial Expansion

• The slavery issue caused a deadlock in territorial expansion during the 1850s.
• The North, motivated by Manifest Destiny, desired Canada.
• The South sought control of Cuba.
• Neither section could achieve its goal because the other opposed it.

Pacific Railroad Promoters and the Gadsden Purchase

Transportation Challenges

• California and Oregon were isolated from the rest of the country.
• Sea routes via the Isthmus of Panama and around South America were lengthy.
• Travel by covered wagon was slow, dangerous, and arduous.

Debate Over the Transcontinental Railroad Route

• Supporters of railroads proposed several routes to the Pacific Coast.
• The high cost of construction meant only one line could be built initially.
• The choice of terminus — North or South — was crucial because it would bring significant economic benefits.
• The South, which was falling behind the North from an economic standpoint, wanted a railroad extending through the southwestern territories to California.

The Gadsden Purchase

• The best railway route to the Pacific was slightly south of the Mexican border.
• James Gadsden of South Carolina negotiated the Gadsden Purchase with Mexico.
• The treaty ceded  29,670 square miles of land, which is part of present-day Arizona and New Mexico, to the U.S. for $10 million.
• Northerners criticized the payment for what they saw as desert.
• Despite criticism, the Senate approved the treaty, which established the southern border of the U.S.

Impact of the Gadsden Purchase on Railroad Expansion

• The Gadsden Purchase supported the South’s push for a southern railroad route.
• The southern route was more feasible due to the lower mountains and organized territories.
• Texas and New Mexico (with the Gadsden Purchase) were organized territories with federal protection.
• Northern and central routes faced challenges with unorganized territories and Indian resistance.

AHC Note — The Gadsden Purchase completed the formation of the Continental United States — from the East Coast to the West Coast. It essentially ended America’s Westward Expansion and fulfilled Manifest Destiny.

Northern Response to Railroad Expansion

• Northern boosters argued for organizing Nebraska to enable a northern railroad route.
• Thousands of pioneers were ready to settle in Nebraska.
• Many Southerners opposed organizing Nebraska, fearing it would create new Free Soil states.

Douglas’s Kansas-Nebraska Scheme

Stephen A. Douglas and the Pacific Railroad

• Senator Stephen Douglas wanted to break the North-South deadlock on westward expansion.
• Douglas was invested in Chicago real estate and railway stock, so he wanted to make Chicago the eastern terminus of the railroad.
• His goals included benefiting his region, endearing himself to Illinois voters, and increasing his wealth.

The Kansas-Nebraska Act and Popular Sovereignty

• Douglas proposed dividing Nebraska into two territories — Kansas and Nebraska.
• Popular Sovereignty would determine the status of slavery in these territories.
• Kansas was expected to become a Slave State due to its proximity to slaveholding Missouri.
• Nebraska was expected to become a Free State due to its proximity to Iowa, a Free Soil State.

Repeal of the Missouri Compromise

• The Missouri Compromise of 1820 banned slavery in the Nebraska Territory, north of the 36° 30′ line.
• Douglas’s plan to introduce Popular Sovereignty required repealing the Missouri Compromise.
• This risked disrupting the fragile balance established by the Compromise of 1850.

Support for the Kansas-Nebraska Bill

• Southerners saw the Kansas-Nebraska Bill as a way to add another Slave State.
• President Pierce, influenced by Southern advisers, supported the bill, even though it would overturn the Missouri Compromise and allow for Popular Sovereignty in the new territories.

Passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Bill

• The Missouri Compromise was viewed by the North as nearly as sacred as the Constitution.
• Free Soil members of Congress opposed the bill.
• Senator Stephen A. Douglas used forceful rhetoric and complex arguments to push the bill through Congress.
• The bill passed with significant support from Southerners.
• The debate was so heated that some members carried weapons with them in Congress for protection.

Motivations Behind Douglas’s Actions

• Historians debate Douglas’s motives in supporting the Kansas-Nebraska Bill.
  • His personal interests included investments in Chicago real estate and railway stock.
  • Some critics believed Douglas sought the presidency in 1856.
  • Supporters argue that if Douglas had not championed the bill, another politician would have taken up the cause.
• Douglas was indifferent to the issue of slavery in the territories and failed to recognize the moral concerns of many Northerners.
• The repeal of the Missouri Compromise was a concern for Abolitionists.
• Northerners resolved to resist further Southern demands for slave territory.
• Abraham Lincoln noted that the North wanted to offer Western pioneers “a clean bed, with no snakes in it.”
• While Douglas foresaw a “hell of a storm,” he underestimated its intensity.
• In the North, Douglas was labeled a “Judas” and a “traitor.”
• Despite the backlash, Douglas retained support among Democrats, especially in Illinois.

Congress Legislates a Civil War

Significance of the Kansas-Nebraska Act

• The Kansas-Nebraska Act was a significant piece of legislation.
• It is considered a cause of the Civil War.
• It played a crucial role in escalating tensions leading to the conflict.
• Northern Abolitionists were upset by the Kansas-Nebraska Act.
• They condemned it as an act of bad faith, referring to its supporters as “Nebrascals.”

Impact of the Kansas-Nebraska Act

• The Fugitive Slave Law of 1850 was effectively ignored.
• The Kansas-Nebraska Act dismantled two key compromises:
  • The Missouri Compromise of 1820, which it specifically repealed.
  • The Compromise of 1850 was undermined by altering the political landscape.
• Ralph Waldo Emerson observed that the Kansas-Nebraska Act left people disillusioned, describing it as leaving them “staring.”
• Northern Abolitionists and Southern Fire Eaters were both dissatisfied:
  • Abolitionists were angered by the possible expansion of slavery.
  • Fire Eaters were infuriated when Free Soilers tried to gain control of Kansas and make it a Free State.

Fallout for the Democratic Party

• The Kansas-Nebraska Act created division within the Democratic Party.
• Despite electing a President in 1856, the Democrats did not win another election for 28 years.

Emergence of the Republican Party

• The Republican Party was established in response to the Kansas-Nebraska Act.
• It started in the Midwest, particularly in Wisconsin and Michigan, as a reaction against the expansion of slavery.
• The party quickly attracted former Whigs, Democrats, Free Soilers, Know-Nothings, and other opponents of the Kansas-Nebraska Act.
• It spread rapidly, gained significant support, and became a major political force within two years.
• The Republican Party elected a Speaker of the House of Representatives within its first two years.
• It was not merely a third-party movement but quickly became the second major political party, though it remained primarily in the North
• Many Southerners viewed the Republican Party with hostility and referred to it as an “abolition party.”

Additional Resources for Renewing the Sectional Struggle

The notes on this page are based on the 16th edition of The American Pageant. We have expanded on the source material with additional details, corrections, and links to Encyclopedia Entries that explain topics in more detail. For more information, including terms and definitions, see the following:

• Advanced Placement United States History (APUSH) Units
• The South and the Slavery Controversy (1793–1860)
• Manifest Destiny and Its Legacy (1841–1848)
• Renewing the Sectional Struggle (1848–1854)
• Drifting Toward Disunion (1854–1861)
• Girding for War: The North and the South (1861–1865)
• The Furnace of Civil War (1861–1865)
• The Ordeal of Reconstruction (1865–1877)