Skip to main content

Unit 5 · Topic 5.6

5.6 Failure of Compromise

In the 1850s, compromise broke down. The Kansas–Nebraska Act (1854) erased the Missouri Compromise line and led to violence in 'Bleeding Kansas', the Republican Party rose in the North, the Dred Scott decision (1857) declared that Congress could not ban slavery in the territories, and John Brown's raid (1859) deepened Southern fears.

Key terms

  • Kansas–Nebraska Act
  • Bleeding Kansas
  • Republican Party
  • Dred Scott v. Sandford
  • Lincoln–Douglas debates
  • John Brown

See it on a map: 1854: The Kansas–Nebraska Act

The Kansas–Nebraska Act (1854)

Senator Stephen Douglas of Illinois wanted to organize the Nebraska Territory so a transcontinental railroad could run west from Chicago. To win Southern votes, his bill divided the area into Kansas and Nebraska and let settlers decide on slavery by popular sovereignty. Because both territories lay north of 36°30′, the act repealed the Missouri Compromise.

Northerners were furious that a line respected for more than thirty years had been erased. The act destroyed the Whig Party, which split along sectional lines, and led to the founding of the Republican Party in 1854. The Republicans united former Whigs, Free-Soilers, antislavery Democrats and some Know-Nothings around one main goal: stopping slavery's spread into the territories. They were a purely Northern party.

Bleeding Kansas

Popular sovereignty turned Kansas into a battleground. Proslavery 'Border Ruffians' crossed from Missouri to vote illegally, creating a proslavery territorial legislature, while antislavery settlers, some sponsored by New England groups, set up a rival government. In May 1856 a proslavery force sacked the free-soil town of Lawrence. Days later, the abolitionist John Brown and his followers killed five proslavery settlers at Pottawatomie Creek. Dozens of people died in the violence that followed.

The violence reached Congress too. In May 1856, after Senator Charles Sumner of Massachusetts gave a fierce antislavery speech, Representative Preston Brooks of South Carolina beat him with a cane on the Senate floor. Many Southerners praised Brooks; Northerners saw proof of Southern brutality.

In 1857–1858 President James Buchanan backed the proslavery Lecompton Constitution for Kansas even though most settlers opposed it. Douglas broke with Buchanan over it, splitting the Democrats, and Kansas voters rejected it. Kansas entered the Union as a free state in 1861.

Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857)

Dred Scott was an enslaved man whose owner had taken him to live in the free state of Illinois and the free Wisconsin Territory. He sued for his freedom.

Chief Justice Roger Taney's majority opinion ruled that Black people, whether enslaved or free, were not citizens and so could not sue in federal court. It also ruled that Congress had no power to ban slavery in the territories, because that would deprive slaveholders of their property without due process under the Fifth Amendment. This meant the Missouri Compromise had been unconstitutional all along.

Southerners celebrated. Republicans were outraged, because the ruling made their main goal unconstitutional, and many Northerners feared that a 'Slave Power' controlled the federal government.

Lincoln–Douglas and John Brown

In 1858 Abraham Lincoln challenged Douglas for his Illinois Senate seat. In his 'House Divided' speech, Lincoln argued the nation could not remain half slave and half free. In seven debates, Lincoln pressed Douglas on how popular sovereignty could survive Dred Scott. At Freeport, Douglas answered that settlers could keep slavery out by refusing to pass laws protecting it. This Freeport Doctrine kept him popular in Illinois, and he won the seat, but it angered Southern Democrats. Lincoln became a national figure.

In October 1859 John Brown led a raid on the federal arsenal at Harpers Ferry, Virginia, hoping to arm enslaved people for a revolt. It failed, and Brown was tried and hanged for treason against Virginia. Some Northerners hailed him as a martyr, which convinced many white Southerners that the North wanted to destroy slavery by violence.

Worked examples

Try each one yourself first, then open the solution.

  1. Example 1

    Applying a court case

    Short-answer practice: Briefly explain ONE way the Dred Scott decision (1857) affected national politics.

    Show the solution
    1. Step 1: State the key ruling accurately.
    2. Step 2: Identify which group was affected and how.
    3. Step 3: Explain the political consequence.

    Answer: Model answer: In Dred Scott v. Sandford, the Supreme Court ruled that Congress could not ban slavery in the territories, which meant the Republican Party's central goal of stopping slavery's expansion was unconstitutional. Instead of settling the issue, the ruling convinced many Northerners that a 'Slave Power' controlled the national government, which strengthened the Republican Party and made compromise even harder.

Common mistakes

  • Saying the Kansas–Nebraska Act extended the Missouri Compromise. It repealed it by allowing slavery north of 36°30′ through popular sovereignty.
  • Thinking Dred Scott only decided one man's freedom. Its broader rulings on citizenship and congressional power were what made it explosive.
  • Saying Lincoln won the 1858 Senate race. Douglas kept his seat; Lincoln gained national fame.

On the exam

  • The 1850s sequence (Compromise of 1850, Kansas–Nebraska, Bleeding Kansas, Dred Scott, John Brown) is a favorite for causation essays on the Civil War. Know the order and how each made the next worse.
  • The rise of the Republican Party and the collapse of the Whigs is a key change in the party system.

Connected topics

Videos

  • The FAILURE of Compromise Over SLAVERY [APUSH Review]

    Heimler's HistoryWatch on YouTube (opens in a new tab)

  • Bleeding Kansas (The Kansas-Nebraska Act and Its Consequences)

    Tom RicheyWatch on YouTube (opens in a new tab)

  • The Dred Scott Decision: Crash Course Black American History #16

    CrashCourseWatch on YouTube (opens in a new tab)

  • #48 - APUSH 5.6 Failure of Compromise [UPDATED]

    APUSH SlidesWatch on YouTube (opens in a new tab)

  • Causes of the Civil War in Under 3 mins (APUSH Unit 5 Topic 6) 5.6

    Maximum InsightWatch on YouTube (opens in a new tab)

Check yourself

5 questions on 5.6 Failure of Compromise. Pick an answer to see if you got it, and why.

Question 1 of 5

The Kansas–Nebraska Act of 1854 contributed to the formation of the Republican Party mainly because it

Question 2 of 5

John Brown's raid on the federal armory at Harpers Ferry, Virginia, in 1859 increased sectional tension mainly because

"We are now far into the fifth year, since a policy was initiated, with the avowed object, and confident promise, of putting an end to slavery agitation. Under the operation of that policy, that agitation has not only, not ceased, but has constantly augmented. In my opinion, it will not cease, until a crisis shall have been reached, and passed."

"'A house divided against itself cannot stand.' I believe this government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved—I do not expect the house to fall—but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing, or all the other. Either the opponents of slavery, will arrest the further spread of it, and place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is in course of ultimate extinction; or its advocates will push it forward, till it shall become alike lawful in all the States, old as well as new—North as well as South."

Source: Abraham Lincoln, speech accepting the Illinois Republican Party's nomination for the U.S. Senate, Springfield, Illinois, June 16, 1858.

Question 3 of 5

The "policy" Lincoln refers to in the first paragraph was

Question 4 of 5

Lincoln's warning that slavery might become "alike lawful in all the States" was most directly a response to

Question 5 of 5

Lincoln's position in the speech differed most from that of his opponent, Stephen Douglas, who

0 of 5 answered