3 new political parties 3 - wikispacesdehushistory.wikispaces.com/file/view/10.3.pdf · 3 new...

Chapter 10 Section 3 • 355

Section 3New Political Parties

Setting the Scene The differences between the North and the Southwere bound to cause political conflict, but did they have to lead to a lengthycivil war? The answer to this question requires an understanding of politics inthe 1850s. The war occurred when it did and in the way it did because politi-cians could not solve the question of slavery.

Politicians might have been able to keep slavery from tearing the nationapart if Americans had not annexed and settled new lands to the west of theMississippi. This newly settled land forced an old question back into politics:whether or not slavery would be allowed in the territories. Each new state thatjoined the Union could tip the balance in Congress in favor of or against slaveryin the future.

In the 1840s, Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote in opposition to the war withMexico, “The United States will conquer Mexico, but it will be as the manswallows the arsenic; Mexico will poisonus.” As you have read, the United Stateswon the Mexican War and took a largeexpanse of territory as a reward. Yet thefight to open or close this and other territo-ries to slavery would ultimately destroyrelations between the North and the South.

Effects of the MissouriCompromiseCongress had made its first attempt toaddress the question of whether to extendslavery in the territories with the MissouriCompromise of 1820. In the short run, thecompromise maintained the balance in theSenate between slave and free states. It alsosought to address the long-term issue ofwestward expansion by stating that any

New Political Parties3

MAIN IDEA

A congressional compromise failed to end disagreementover slavery in the territories. Meanwhile, the politicalparty system broke down as new political parties arose.

READING FOCUS

• What were the effects of the MissouriCompromise?

• What did the Compromise of 1850accomplish?

• How did political parties change in the1850s?

• Why did Stephen Douglas propose theKansas-Nebraska Act?

KEY TERMS

Compromise of 1850Fugitive Slave ActnativismKansas-Nebraska Actpopular sovereignty

TARGET READING SKILL

Summarize Copy the web diagram below.As you read this section, fill in the web dia-gram with important elements of the Com-promise of 1850.

Compromiseof 1850

The end of the Mexican Warbrought the vast territories ofCalifornia and New Mexico underAmerican control, raising newquestions about the expansionof slavery.

Chapter 10 • Section 3 355

SECTION OBJECTIVES

1. Discover some effects of theMissouri Compromise.

2. Learn what was accomplished bythe Compromise of 1850.

3. See how political parties changed inthe 1850s.

4. Find out why Stephen Douglas pro-posed the Kansas-Nebraska Act.

BELLRINGER

Warm-Up Activity Ask students todiscuss what they know about differ-ences among regions in the UnitedStates today. What effect might thesedifferences have on the nation as a whole?

Activating Prior KnowledgeReview prior class discussions aboutthe differing economies in the Northand the South, which gave rise to acontinuation of the use of slaves in theSouth and the need for new immigrantsin the North.

TARGET READING SKILL

Ask students to complete the graphicorganizer on this page as they read thesection. See the Section ReadingSupport Transparencies for a completedversion of this graphic organizer.

ACTIVITY

Connecting withGovernment

Ask students to write a paragraphsummarizing how the failure of politi-cians to solve the important issues ofthe day led to the rise of new politicalparties in the 1850s. (Verbal/Linguistic)

RESOURCE DIRECTORYTeaching ResourcesGuided Reading and Review booklet, p. 43

Other Print ResourcesHistorical Outline Map Book The Missouri

Compromise, 1820, p. 45

TechnologySection Reading Support TransparenciesGuided Reading Audiotapes (English/Spanish),

Ch. 10

Student Edition on Audio CD, Ch. 10Prentice Hall Presentation Pro CD-ROM, Ch. 10

PWSurvey05 TE_CH10 1/12/04 2:38 PM Page 355

356 • Chapter 10 Section 3

LESSON PLAN

Focus Explain that existing politicalorganizations in the 1850s failed to dealwith the question of slavery. New polit-ical parties emerged in order to try tosolve the problem.

Instruct Discuss the inability of politi-cians to deal with slavery. Ask why theCompromise of 1850 provided only atemporary solution. Why did SenatorJohn C. Calhoun think it was impossi-ble for southern interests to be pro-tected by the existing government?How were both Northerners andSoutherners able to justify their standon slavery in terms of the United StatesConstitution? Why did the Kansas-Nebraska Act outrage northerners?

Assess/Reteach Can students sug-gest approaches politicians might havetaken to resolve differences betweenantislavery and pro-slavery states thatwould have been less inflammatorythan the approaches described in thissection?

RESOURCE DIRECTORYOther Print ResourcesNystrom Atlas of Our Country Settling the West,

pp. 28–29Historical Outline Map Book The Compromise

of 1850, p. 46

TechnologyColor Transparencies Historical Maps, A19Sounds of an Era Audio CD John C. Calhoun for

the Compromise of 1850 (time: one minute, 45seconds)

Exploring Primary Sources in U.S. History CD-ROM A Frontier Lady, Sarah Royce

Map Skills The issues of whethernewly acquired states and territorieswould be slave or free; the boundariesof Texas; how to deal with slavery inWashington, D.C.; and the fate of fugi-tive slaves.

CAPTION ANSWERS

states to be created out of lands north of 36° 30' N latitude would befree states. The compromise did not, however, settle the issue ofwhether slavery would be legal while the lands in the west were still ter-ritories.

After the Mexican War, the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo of 1848gave the United States a large piece of land that had been part ofMexico. Because much of this new territory was south of the line set bythe Missouri Compromise, Northerners feared that it would eventuallybe divided into several slave states. This would give the South a major-ity vote in the Senate and an advantage in the Electoral College. Thebest way to prevent the creation of more slave states, reasoned antislav-ery Northerners, was to keep slavery out of these areas while they werestill territories.

Southerners were equally firm in insisting that the national govern-ment had no right to prevent free citizens from taking their property tothe territories. Property, according to the law, included enslaved people.

In the presidential election of 1848, both major parties hoped toattract voters from all sides of the slavery debate. Thus they nominatedcandidates who avoided discussing the slavery issue. The Democratschose Governor Lewis Cass of Michigan, while the Whigs chose a Mexi-

can War general, Zachary Taylor. Angered by their parties’ unwillingness to confront slavery, some members

from both parties who opposed slavery in the territories split off and formed theFree Soil Party. The Free Soilers did not win any states in the 1848 election, butthey did take enough votes away from Cass to give Taylor a narrow victory.

The Compromise of 1850The issue of territorial slavery resurfaced in 1850 when California, flooded withmigrants during the Gold Rush, asked to join the Union as a free state. Admit-ting California as a free state would upset the fragile balance between free andslave states in the Senate. The stage was set for one of the most dramatic eventsin American history.

Clay Proposes a Compromise At the center of this drama were three of themost respected senators of that (or any) era:John C. Calhoun of South Carolina, Henry Clayof Kentucky, and Daniel Webster of Massachu-setts. All had begun their long political careers inCongress prior to the War of 1812. When theSenate assembled in 1849, the 73-year-old Clay,who was called “Gallant Harry of the West,”tried to solve the nation’s dilemma with wordsrather than blood.

Clay’s plan for a compromise over slaverywould become known as the Compromise of1850. Seeking a middle ground on the slaverydebate, Clay proposed five separate laws, some ofwhich favored the North and some of whichfavored the South:1. Congress would admit California as a free state.

356 Chapter 10 • The Coming of the Civil War

90°W

Gulf of Mexico

ATLANTIC

OCEAN30°N

80°W

Texas

Fla.La.

Miss. Ga.Ala.

S.C.

N.C.

Ark.

Md.

N.J.

Va.Mo.

Conn.Ind.

R.I.Ohio

Ill.

Mass.

Penn.

Del.

Ky.

N.H.

N.Y.

Me.Vt.

Tenn.IndianTerritory

MEXICO

New MexicoTerritory

Calif.

UtahTerritory

UnorganizedTerritory

Iowa

Wis.Mich.

Territory

OregonMinnesotaTerritory

BRITISH NORTH AMERICA

States and territoriesclosed to slavery

States and territoryopen to slavery

Territories to voteon slavery

0 200 400 mi.

0 200 400 km

N

The Compromise of 1850

MAP SKILLS During the debatethat led to the Compromise of1850, all the great speakers ofthe Senate had their say. Thecompromise that resulted isshown in the map below. RegionsWhat issues did the Compromiseof 1850 attempt to address?

Statehood for Florida The territoryof Florida drafted a state constitutionin 1838 and submitted it to Congressthe next year. At the time, Florida hada population of 48,000, of which21,000 were slaves. In keeping withthe Missouri Compromise, Congressadmitted new states to the Union inpairs, one slave and one free. In1845, Florida entered the Union asthe 27th state and as a slave state.Iowa entered the next year as a freestate. Reflecting Florida’s plantationeconomy, a planter named WilliamMoseley was elected the state’s firstgovernor.



ACTIVITY

Student PortfolioYou may wish to have students placethis activity in their portfolios: Havestudents write brief essays entitled“Growing Tension” in which theyattempt to capture and convey thespirit of the 1850s, focusing on thegrowing tensions between North andSouth. Students should refer to partic-ular historical events in their essays.(Verbal/Linguistic)

BACKGROUND

BiographyHenry Clay was terrified of a countrysplit over the issue of slavery. In argu-ing for the Compromise of 1850, he said,“I implore, as the best blessing whichheaven can bestow me on earth, that ifthe direful and sad event of the dissolu-tion of the Union shall happen, I maynot survive to behold the sad and heart-rending spectacle.” Clay received thisdubious blessing when he passed awayjust two years later.

2. The people of the territories of New Mexico and Utah would decide forthemselves whether slavery would be legal.

3. Congress would abolish the sale of slaves, but not slavery, in Washington, D.C. 4. Texas would give up claims to New Mexico for $10 million.5. A Fugitive Slave Act would order all citizens of the United States to assist

in the return of enslaved people who had escaped from their owners. Itwould also deny a jury trial to escaped slaves.

Calhoun Opposes Compromise Debate over the compromise dragged onfor months. On March 4, 1850, the Senate gathered to hear the opinion ofJohn C. Calhoun of South Carolina. Calhoun, a direct and dynamic speaker,would present one of the great summaries of the southern view of the crisis.

Many in the Senate felt great emotion when Calhoun’s turn to present hisviews came. They knew that the 67-year-old senator was ill and that he proba-bly did not have long to live. Calhoun was so weak that he asked James Masonof Virginia to read his speech for him.

As the speech began, Calhoun—through Senator Mason—stated the prob-lem the nation faced:

“ I have, Senators, believed from the first that . . . the subject of slav-ery would, if not prevented by some timely and effective measure,end in disunion [of the United States]. . . . It has reached a pointwhen it can no longer be disguised or denied that the Union is in dan-ger. You have thus had forced upon you the greatest and the gravestquestion that can ever come under your consideration: How can theUnion be preserved?”

—John C. Calhoun

The “great and primary” cause of the crisis, Calhoun said, was that the Northnow had “the exclusive power of controlling the Government, which leaves the[South] without any adequate means of protecting itself against . . . encroach-ment and oppression.” Calhoun was referring to the fact that the North’sgrowing population had given it more representatives in the House and more


VIEWING HISTORY In Febru-ary 1850, Henry Clay warned thata failure to compromise would leadto “furious” and “bloody” war.Cause and Effect What led Clay topropose a compromise?

Sounds of an Era

Listen to Calhoun’s speech andother sounds from the 1850s.

Viewing History The vast territoryacquired from Mexico exacerbated thedebate over slavery; Clay’s proposalsought to appease those on both sidesof the slavery issue and thus avert war.

CAPTION ANSWERS

About the PresidentsZachary Taylor (1849–1850) provedto be a strong-willed President. This surprised many people, as thetwelfth President had never beforeheld political office. He was a slaveowner, but he wanted to stop thespread of slavery. He proposed toadmit California and New Mexico tothe Union, knowing that both wouldapply as free states. Furthermore,Taylor promised to put down anysouthern rebellion with force. Healso appeared ready to veto a con-gressional compromise, supportedby northern Whigs. Only after Taylor’sdeath did the Compromise of 1850become law. Source: MichaelHarwood, “Zachary Taylor,” TheAmerican Heritage® Pictorial Historyof the United States, vol. 1, 1968.

From the Archives of®

PWSurvey05 TE_CH10 1/12/04 2:38 PM 57


votes in the Electoral College. Calhoun believed that southernstates had the right to leave the Union if that were necessary fortheir own protection.

Calhoun made clear that the South did not want to leave theUnion. He also stated, however, that the South would not give upits liberty to save the Union: “The South asks for justice, simplejustice, and less she ought not to take,” he stated. “She has nocompromise to offer, but the Constitution; and no concession orsurrender to make.”

Today, Americans believe that slavery is morally wrong because itrobs people of their liberty. Calhoun and other white southernplanters believed that stopping slavery was morally wrong, because itinterfered with their liberty to own enslaved people as property. Gov-ernment, they believed, should protect this liberty.

Southern planters held that if the federal government intendedto reduce their rights or threaten their property, then it was nolonger a government worthy of their respect. From the point ofview of Calhoun, it was the northern section, not the southern sec-tion, that was twisting the Constitution and the intentions of theFramers. The ringing finale of his speech made this clear: “I have

exerted myself . . . with the intention of saving the Union, if it could be done;and if it could not, [with saving] the section . . . which I sincerely believe hasjustice and the Constitution on its side.”

Webster Favors Compromise Three days after Calhoun’s speech, DanielWebster, the nation’s leading orator, stood to speak. Webster was a large manwith dark, intense eyes. His voice was both magnetic and persuasive. In thepast, Webster had opposed any extension of slavery into the territories. Fearingfor the existence of the Union, Webster surprised his audience by giving his sup-

port to each of Clay’s proposals:

“ I wish to speak today, not as a Massachusetts man, nor as a north-ern man, but as an American. . . . I speak today for the preservationof the Union. ‘Hear me for my cause.’”

—Daniel Webster

Webster went on to speak for several hours. Believing that slaverywould never be practical in New Mexico, he supported Clay’s compro-mise. He also maintained that it was a constitutional duty to return fugi-tive slaves to their owners. Webster’s speech outraged northernabolitionists and many of his longtime supporters. They accused Websterof putting financial matters ahead of issues of freedom and humanity.Northern business owners, however, supported Webster’s stancebecause they feared the loss of valuable southern trade if the Unionwere dissolved.

Congress Approves the Compromise As the debate continuedover the Compromise of 1850, President Taylor set forth his own set ofproposals, causing many to fear a presidential veto of the Compromise.Taylor’s sudden death in July 1850, however, brought Millard Fillmoreto the presidency. Working with Senator Stephen A. Douglas of Illinois,who had taken over for an exhausted Clay, Congress eventually passedthe Compromise of 1850.


VIEWING HISTORY Massa-chusetts senator Daniel Websterused his powerful oratorical skill topersuade Congress to adopt theCompromise of 1850. DrawingInferences Why did northern busi-nessmen favor the compromise?

One controversial part of the Com-promise was the Fugitive Slave Act,which made it easier for slaveholdersto recapture escaped slaves.

Viewing History They thought that ifthe Union were dissolved, they wouldlose valuable southern trade.

CAPTION ANSWERS

ACTIVITY

Connecting withGovernment

Organize the class into groups to inves-tigate the major issues surrounding theCompromise of 1850. Each group shouldresearch the Constitution to identifyplaces that support John C. Calhoun’sargument for slaveholding and therights of slaveholders. Then groupsshould research the Constitution for a federal power that Congress couldhave used to prohibit the spread ofslavery into the New Mexico and UtahTerritories. Have each group summarizeits findings in a one-page report.(Groups will probably cite the FifthAmendment to support Calhoun’s posi-tion and Article IV, Section 3, clause 2for Congress to block the spread ofslavery.) (Verbal/Linguistic)

BACKGROUND

Art HistoryPhotographer Matthew Brady(1823–1896), the son of Irish immi-grants, is best known for his “on thespot” studies of the Civil War. But in1844, when he opened a studio in NewYork City, he was well known for hisportraits of celebrities. In 1861 Bradypublished a portfolio entitled Gallery ofIllustrious Americans, containing stud-ies of Henry Clay and Daniel Websterand a portrait of John C. Calhoun. Overa 50-year span, Brady photographedevery President from John QuincyAdams to William McKinley, includingAbraham Lincoln, his favorite study.

RESOURCE DIRECTORYOther Print ResourcesHistorical Outline Map Book Growth of the

United States to 1853, p. 42



ACTIVITY

Connecting withCitizenship

Pair students and ask each pair to cre-ate two editorial cartoons—one thatexpresses a Know-Nothing position on an issue that concerned the nationand a second cartoon that ridicules theKnow-Nothing position on that issue.Display selected cartoons and interpretthem as a class. (Visual/Spatial)

BACKGROUND

Voting PatternsBecause African Americans todayoverwhelmingly favor Democratic can-didates, African Americans are stronglyidentified with that party. But until the1930s, African Americans in the Northgenerally voted Republican. In 1856 agathering of voters resolved: “That we,the colored citizens of Boston, will support with our voices and our votes,John C. Frémont, of California, asPresident of the United States . . . [T]hatwhile we regard the Republican partyas the people’s party . . . and while weare willing to unite with them to resistthe aggressions of the Slave Power, wedo not pledge ourselves to go furtherwith the Republicans than [they] will gowith us.”

As Calhoun had foreseen, Southerners were not satisfied with the compro-mise, although it did bring a brief calm to the nation. In reality, the Compromiseof 1850 solved nothing beyond determining that California would be a freestate. It did not settle the issue of slavery in the area newly acquired fromMexico. Part of the compromise, the Fugitive Slave Act, actually made the situ-ation worse by infuriating many Northerners—including Harriet BeecherStowe, who expressed her outrage in her book, Uncle Tom’s Cabin.

Changes in Political PartiesDuring the early 1850s, the system of two powerful national parties began tobreak down. One sign of this breakdown was the decline of the Whig Party. In1852 the Whigs, rejecting President Fillmore because of his support for theCompromise of 1850, nominated Winfield Scott, a general from the MexicanWar. The Democrats chose Franklin Pierce of New Hampshire. Pierce won theelection in a landslide.

Decline of the Whigs The Whigs never won another presidential contest,and by the end of the 1850s the Whig Party had largely disappeared. The slav-ery issue had badly hurt the Whigs. Many of the northern Whigs had beenProtestants who became disgusted with the willingness of Whig leaders to com-promise on slavery.

Another reason the Whigs faded away was that the old issues that haddivided political parties in the 1830s had been resolved. Few people arguedabout banks as long as the United States was prosperous and expanding. Themen at the center of the Jacksonian-Whig struggles—Jackson, Clay, Webster,Calhoun—were either dead or dying. Political parties seemed to exist only toprotect their hold on government jobs and contracts.

Many believed the time had come for a new generation of leaders to comeforward. Those leaders who rose to power in the 1850s would have to face thenew issues dividing the nation.

Rise of the Know-Nothings Slavery and unhappiness with politics were notthe only issues that brought down the Whigs. The equally powerful issue ofnativism also played a part. Nativism was a movement to ensure that native-born Americans received better treatment than immigrants. It arose in responseto a surge in immigration between 1846 and 1854, whenclose to 3 million Europeans arrived in the United States.Many evangelical Protestants were particularly disturbedby the high number of Catholics among the immigrants.

The fear of immigrants led in 1849 to the formationof a secret nativist society called the Order of the Star-Spangled Banner. Within a few years, its membershiptotaled around one million. Members of the groupinsisted on complete secrecy, using passwords and specialhandshakes to identify each other. They always replied toquestions about the organization with the answer, “Iknow nothing.”

In 1854, nativists went public by forming a politicalorganization, the American Party. It pledged to work against Irish Catholiccandidates and to campaign for laws requiring immigrants to wait longerbefore they could become citizens. Because it was closely associated with theOrder of the Star-Spangled Banner, the American Party was also called theKnow-Nothings.


VIEWING HISTORY DemocratFranklin Pierce of New Hampshiredefeated the Whig candidate forPresident in 1852. RecognizingCause and Effect Why did the WhigParty decline in the 1850s?

The Know-Nothings called them-selves “Native Americans”—bywhich they meant Americans bornin the United States—and whippedup fears against immigrants.

Viewing History The old issues thathad united Whigs were settled; manynorthern Whigs were unhappy withtheir party’s compromises over slavery.

CAPTION ANSWERSCUSTOMIZE FOR ...Less Proficient Readers

Have students read the section’s main headingsand then write a question based on each, fillingin the answers as they read.



Know-Nothings claimed that they were committed to “the greatwork of Americanizing Americans.” They declared:

“ [E]very American and naturalized Protestant citizen throughout theUnion, [should] use his utmost exertions to aid the cause byorganizing and freeing the country from that monster [Catholicism]which . . . is only waiting . . . to approach to plant its flag of tyranny,persecution, and oppression among us.”

—The American Party

The Know-Nothings did very well in local elections in northernstates. Their main supporters were voters worried that immigrationwould lead to crime and vice, and working men fearful of losing jobs toIrish and German immigrants.

The Kansas-Nebraska ActAmid growing turmoil over immigration and religion, Senator StephenDouglas of Illinois again raised the issue of slavery in the territories.Douglas had two conflicting ambitions.

First, Douglas wanted Chicago to benefit from the development ofthe West. The sooner the territories of Kansas and Nebraska becamestates, the sooner railroads could be built across their land to linkChicago, the largest city in his state, with the West. Chicago wouldboom as newly-settled farmers in the Midwest sent their crops there viarailroads to be sold.

Second, Douglas wanted to run for President. To do that, heneeded the support of southern Democrats. Pushing statehood for Kansas andNebraska would benefit Chicago but it would cost Douglas supporters in theSouth. Under the terms of the Missouri Compromise of 1820, Kansas andNebraska would become free states. The North would then become still morepowerful as four new free state senators joined Congress, and Southernerswould blame Douglas.

To win the support of both Northerners and Southerners, Douglas intro-duced the Kansas-Nebraska Act in the Senate in January 1854. The Kansas-Nebraska Act supported the practice of popular sovereignty, or letting thepeople in a territory decide whether to allow slavery there, instead of restrictingthe decision-making power to Congress. In effect, Douglas was asking thenation to repeal the Missouri Compromise and its boundary line of 36° 30' Nand rely instead on popular sovereignty. As Douglas wrote to a Southerner inApril 1854:

“ The great principle of self-government is at stake, and surely the peo-ple of this country are never going to decide that the principle uponwhich our whole republican system rests is vicious and wrong.”

—Stephen A. Douglas

Douglas knew that the Kansas-Nebraska Act would make Southerners happy.After all, it raised the possibility that Kansas and Nebraska might enter the unionas slave states, which would have been impossible under the Missouri Compromise.Douglas also thought that Northerners would back the Kansas-Nebraska Act.Northerners, he believed, would decide that slavery would never take hold on theGreat Plains, where the weather was relatively harsh and cotton could not grow.

READING CHECKWhy did Northerners andSoutherners react differently tothe Kansas-Nebraska Act?


Federalism The term “federalism”describes a system of government inwhich power is divided between acentral government and smallergovernments.

The Historical Context A centralissue in the debates of the 1850s wasthe proper division of authority betweenthe federal government and the states.Northerners and Southerners dis-agreed over whether the federalgovernment could limit slavery in theterritories and whether states couldsecede from the Union.

The Concept Today Through most ofthe 1900s, the federal governmentgained power at the expense of thestates. In recent years, however, thestates have become increasingly activeand powerful in areas such as socialwelfare policy.

BACKGROUND

The Kansas andNebraska Territories

The desire to build a railroad all theway across the continent to unite theEast and West was the Americandream of the 1850s. No American citycould hope for a greater prize than tobe chosen as the eastern terminus ofthe nation’s transcontinental railway.New Orleans, Memphis, and St. Louiswere among many towns competingwith Chicago to be selected andthereby become the bustling headquar-ters for reaching the wealth and com-merce of the West. But SenatorDouglas knew that a railroad throughthe unsettled land of the West could bebuilt only with the aid of governmentland grants, which could be made only if the region the railroad passedthrough was already surveyed andorganized politically. With this in mind,Douglas introduced a bill to organizethe lands west of Iowa and Missouri—the bill that in its final form provided fora Kansas Territory and a NebraskaTerritory.

RESOURCE DIRECTORYTeaching ResourcesUnits 3/4 booklet

• Section 3 Quiz, p. 43Guide to the Essentials

• Section 3 Summary, p. 54

Other Print ResourcesHistorical Outline Map Book Kansas-Nebraska

Act, 1854, p. 47

READING CHECKIt angered Northerners becausethey believed Douglas was sellingout to the South; Southerners werepleased because it raised the pos-sibility that Kansas and Nebraskamight enter the union as slavestates.


3Section Assessment

Reading Comprehension

1. California was admitted as a freestate; the sale of slaves, but notslavery itself, was made illegal inWashington, D.C.; the Fugitive SlaveAct was passed; New Mexico andUtah would decide on slavery forthemselves; Texas would receive $10 million to settle its border dis-pute with New Mexico.

2. Calhoun presented the fears andworries of Southerners, explainedthat they did not wish to leave theUnion, and outlined what the Southwould need in order to remain.Webster supported the Compromise,fearing for the existence of the Union.

3. Fears and mistrust of immigrantscontributed to nativism and the for-mation of the Know-Nothing Party.

4. (a) They felt that northern Democratshad sold out to the South. (b) Manyleft the Democratic Party for the newRepublican Party.

Critical Thinking and Writing

5. The Missouri Compromise did notaddress the issue of whether slaverywould be legal in the territories; theCompromise of 1850 was equally dis-appointing. It settled only the issueof California as a free state, leavingslavery in the Utah and New Mexicoterritories unresolved.

6. Possible topics: Southerners werepleased that Kansas and Nebraskacould become slave states; North-erners felt Douglas had sold out.


3 Assessment

The people of Kansas and Nebraska would no doubt vote peacefully tobecome free states.

After nine months of debate, Congress passed the Kansas-Nebraska Act. But instead of applauding the bill, as Douglas hadexpected, Northerners were outraged by it. Senator William PittFessenden of Maine, a Whig, called the Kansas-Nebraska Act “a terri-ble outrage.” He said, “The more I look at it the more enraged Ibecome. It needs but little to make me an out & out abolitionist.”Northern members of Douglas’s own party, the Democrats,denounced Douglas for what they saw as a sellout to the South. Mostnorthern Democrats in the Senate voted for the Kansas-Nebraska Actout of loyalty to their party, not because they approved of the princi-ples behind it. As you will read, Douglas was also wrong about apeaceful vote in the territories.

The Creation of the Republican PartyDuring the summer of 1854, people throughout the North held meet-ings to protest the Kansas-Nebraska bill. During one of these meetingsin Michigan, disgusted Northerners launched a new Republican Party,the direct ancestor of today’s party by the same name. Its members ded-icated themselves to stopping the “Slave Power,” as they called the South. Theydeclared that slavery was a great moral evil and vowed to fight against its exten-sion into new territories. They also demanded the repeal of the Kansas-Nebraska Act and the Fugitive Slave Act.

The new Republicans drew their support almost entirely from antislaveryDemocrats, Whigs, and Free Soilers in the North. Farmers, professionals, smallbusiness owners, and craftworkers made up the Republican Party.

New parties appear frequently in American history. Few last very long. Inthe mid-1850s, however, the disappearance of the Whigs and the emotionalissues of nativism and slavery produced two strong parties, the Know-Nothingsand the Republicans. It remained to be seen which of the two would becomethe more powerful.


READINGCOMPREHENSION

1. List the five parts of theCompromise of 1850.

2. What roles did Senator Calhoun andSenator Webster play in passing theCompromise of 1850?

3. Why did some people support theKnow-Nothing Party?

4. (a) Why did the Kansas-NebraskaAct upset many northern voters?(b) How did northern voters respondto the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Act?

CRITICAL THINKINGAND WRITING

5. Identifying Point of View Describewhy the Missouri Compromise satis-fied neither Northerners nor South-erners. Did the Compromise of1850 satisfy them? Explain.

6. Writing to Persuade Write a per-suasive speech from the point ofview of either a Southerner or aNortherner supporting or opposingthe Kansas-Nebraska Act.

INTERPRETING POLIT ICALCARTOONS Stephen Douglaschampions popular sovereignty inthis 1858 cartoon. RecognizingBias What role did Douglas’s politi-cal ambitions play in his proposalof the Kansas-Nebraska Act?

For: An activity on acts of Congress

in the 1850s

Visit: PHSchool.com

Web Code: mrd-4103

PHSchool.com

TEST PREPARATIONHave students read the excerpt from the AmericanParty on the previous page and then complete thesentence below.From the passage, you can infer that the only peoplewhom the Know-Nothings welcomed, besides Protestantsborn in the United States, were—

A Catholic immigrants.B Protestant immigrants who had become

naturalized.C Catholic immigrants who had become

naturalized.D immigrants who were neither Protestant

nor Catholic.

Interpreting Political CartoonsDouglas hoped to be President oneday. He saw the implicit repeal of the Missouri Compromise that theKansas-Nebraska Act entailed as a way to gain the votes of southernDemocrats.

CAPTION ANSWERS

Typing the Web Code when promptedwill bring students directly to detailedinstructions for this activity.

PHSchool.com


http://www.phschool.com/webcodes10/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.gotoWebCode&wcprefix=mrd&wcsuffix=4103

3 new political parties 3 - wikispacesdehushistory.wikispaces.com/file/view/10.3.pdf · 3 new...

Documents