The start of the tension around territorial expansion was due to the imbalance of free and slave states, which was resolved by the Missouri Compromise. There was also disputed boundaries between Texas and Mexico which lead to the Mexican War in 1846. After the war, American politicians could not agree whether states created from Mexican land would be free or not. This was the baseline tension created, however there were other factors that were much more important. The main factor that lead to the tensions created by territorial expansion was the actions of politicians in the 1850’s during the 1850 compromise as these actions caused all the other factors that also created tension. Randall argues that it was the “blundering generations of politicians”
…show more content…
In the early 1850’s Nebraska was unsettled territory. Northerners wanted to see Nebraska developed, but Southerners were less sure about it. In January 1854, Senator Douglas introduced the Kansas-Nebraska Act. He divided the Nebraska territory into two areas; Nebraska and Kansas. This was the start of the tension, and there was no reason to divide the territory apart from making one half a slave state, and one half free. Douglas was confident that his bill would not heighten tension as he was trying to please both sides as he gave the North a free State and the South a free State. However he was wrong, as the Kansas-Nebraska Act caused a “Hell of a Storm”. Most people from the South supported slavery, or for political reasons wanted Kansas to be a slave state. Those from the North were generally opposed slavery in Kansas. The North believed that this was the Slave Power Conspiracy at work. They also didn’t understand why the territory was split into two, as this was encouraging slavery in half of the area. This Northern reaction cause a Southern backlash as passing the bill became a symbol of Southern honour over the North. The competition between the tow sides resulted in election fraud, intimidation and some violence. This tension in and around Kansas was a main contribution to the growing tension between …show more content…
Scott had been a slave of an army surgeon who had taken him from Missouri to posts in Illinois and Wisconsin in the northern part of the Louisiana Purchase during the 1830s. After his owner died in 1843, Scott went before the Missouri courts and sued for his freedom on the bases that he has lived in a free state and a free tertiary for a long period of time. The Supreme Court decided three things; That Scott could not sue for his freedom as he was a Black American and did not have the same rights a white citizen, Scott’s stay in Illinois did not make him free, and that Scott’s stay in Wisconsin made no difference either as the 1820 Missouri Compromise had ban slavery on territories north 36°30′ was illegal and a US citizen had the right to take their ‘property’ into the territories. This emphasises the extent of segregation and sectionalism in America, which in turn would cause underlying tension. Slavery and sectionalism was not the main reason for the heightened tension between 1850 and 1858, however it was an underlying tension that had started many years before and continued to cause tension many years
In the early 1850’s Nebraska was unsettled territory. Northerners wanted to see Nebraska developed, but Southerners were less sure about it. In January 1854, Senator Douglas introduced the Kansas-Nebraska Act. He divided the Nebraska territory into two areas; Nebraska and Kansas. This was the start of the tension, and there was no reason to divide the territory apart from making one half a slave state, and one half free. Douglas was confident that his bill would not heighten tension as he was trying to please both sides as he gave the North a free State and the South a free State. However he was wrong, as the Kansas-Nebraska Act caused a “Hell of a Storm”. Most people from the South supported slavery, or for political reasons wanted Kansas to be a slave state. Those from the North were generally opposed slavery in Kansas. The North believed that this was the Slave Power Conspiracy at work. They also didn’t understand why the territory was split into two, as this was encouraging slavery in half of the area. This Northern reaction cause a Southern backlash as passing the bill became a symbol of Southern honour over the North. The competition between the tow sides resulted in election fraud, intimidation and some violence. This tension in and around Kansas was a main contribution to the growing tension between …show more content…
Scott had been a slave of an army surgeon who had taken him from Missouri to posts in Illinois and Wisconsin in the northern part of the Louisiana Purchase during the 1830s. After his owner died in 1843, Scott went before the Missouri courts and sued for his freedom on the bases that he has lived in a free state and a free tertiary for a long period of time. The Supreme Court decided three things; That Scott could not sue for his freedom as he was a Black American and did not have the same rights a white citizen, Scott’s stay in Illinois did not make him free, and that Scott’s stay in Wisconsin made no difference either as the 1820 Missouri Compromise had ban slavery on territories north 36°30′ was illegal and a US citizen had the right to take their ‘property’ into the territories. This emphasises the extent of segregation and sectionalism in America, which in turn would cause underlying tension. Slavery and sectionalism was not the main reason for the heightened tension between 1850 and 1858, however it was an underlying tension that had started many years before and continued to cause tension many years