The Sack of Lawrence, Kansas, 1856 (1 Viewer)

[BLReed]

"On the morning of May 21, 1856 an armed force of as many as 800 men descended upon the newly formed town of Lawrence in the Territory of Kansas and proceeded to systematically destroy it. With this act, the town of Lawrence became the first casualty in America's Civil War that would officially be declared five years later."

http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/lawrencesack.htm

 

[jazzeum]

The article references the construction of the trans-continental railroad. Many think that this was the true motive for Douglas' opening of the Kansas Nebraska Territory as he was trying to protect the interests of his constituents in the Northwest (as it was then constituted) as well as his presidential ambitions since alternative schemes for the trans-continental railroad had it going through a more southerly route.

In addition, one of the principal reasons Kansas Nebraska became as it inflamed as it did was Douglas' concept of popular sovereignty (not really a new notion as it had been around since the 1840s) and the abolition of the Missouri Compromise, which had generally subsumed the issue of slavery in the national consciousness (excluding the Wilmot Proviso and the Compromise of 1850) since its adoption in 1820.

Kansas Nebraska was really the spark that led to the sack of Lawrence, etc. Ultimately, Douglas' ambitions were hoisted on his own petard, so to speak, during the Lincoln-Douglas Debates.

 

[Terp152]

The article references the construction of the trans-continental railroad. Many think that this was the true motive for Douglas' opening of the Kansas Nebraska Territory as he was trying to protect the interests of his constituents in the Northwest (as it was then constituted) as well as his presidential ambitions since alternative schemes for the trans-continental railroad had it going through a more southerly route.

In addition, one of the principal reasons Kansas Nebraska became as it inflamed as it did was Douglas' concept of popular sovereignty (not really a new notion as it had been around since the 1840s) and the abolition of the Missouri Compromise, which had generally subsumed the issue of slavery in the national consciousness (excluding the Wilmot Proviso and the Compromise of 1850) since its adoption in 1820.

Kansas Nebraska was really the spark that led to the sack of Lawrence, etc. Ultimately, Douglas' ambitions were hoisted on his own petard, so to speak, during the Lincoln-Douglas Debates.

Douglas support of popular sovereignty cost him the support of southern Democrats in the presidential election. Chris

 

[jazzeum]

It wasn't that but how Douglas answered Lincoln's question in the debate at Freeport and subsequent Lecompton position.

The he conventional wisdom is that at Freeport Lincoln asked whether people in a US territory could prohibit slavery before it became a state. Douglas was caught in a bind and said it could. The belief is that this answer cost him the Southern support he had obtained during the Compromise of 1850 and Kansas Nebraska.

Fehrenbacher in his Prelude to Greatness pokes holes in this theory because Douglas had previously answered this question.

In his view, what cost Douglas support of the South was his anti Lecompton position as admission of Kansas was important to the South and his opposition was vital. However, what made it worse for Southeners that he actively worked with the Republicans to defeat the Lecompton faction.

Whichever version is chosen, it was these actions much more than popular sovereignty that earned the South's enmity.