Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

The Kansas-Nebraska Act, passed by Congress in 1854, created the territories of Kansas and Nebraska, allowing settlers in these areas to determine through popular sovereignty whether they would allow slavery there. The act arose from proposals in the early 1850s, for the construction of a transcontinental railroad to link the eastern United States with the Pacific Coast. However, there were disagreements on exactly where the railroad should be built. One of the contenders as the eastern terminus was Chicago, which had the backing of Stephen A. Douglas, the prominent Illinois senator who was also chair of the Senate Committee on Territories. However, Douglas's proposed route could not be viable unless the land along which the railroad traveled was organized into official territories.

At the same time, the area that eventually became the state of Kansas had sufficient population to enable it to apply for admission to the Union. This injected into the western territories the recurring question of slavery. Would this new state be a “free” state or a “slave” state? Since the territory in which Kansas was located was part of the Louisiana Purchase of 1803, it was subject to the Missouri Compromise of 1820. Under that agreement, any states admitted to the Union in the future were to be “free” if they were above the southern boundary of Missouri or “slave” if they were below that line. Thus, Kansas ought to be free.

Southerners, however, vehemently opposed this. For a generation, the Missouri Compromise had worked well, with each free state being offset with the admission of a slave state, but in 1850 California entered the Union as a free state, giving the north two more votes in the U.S. Senate than the south. With no other southern areas ready for admission in the near future, southerners hoped to have Kansas admitted as a slave state to restore the balance of power in the Senate.

Popular Soverignty

The expansion of slavery into the western territories had, by this time, become a major national issue, dividing pro-and antislavery forces. Increasingly, politicians were called upon to publicly express a position on the issue. In an attempt to end the controversy over Kansas and to facilitate construction of the transcontinental railroad west from Chicago, yet avoid being drawn into the slavery controversy, Douglas proposed that the issue be solved through “popular sovereignty,” a device first agreed to in the Compromise of 1850. Under popular sovereignty, the people in a territory—in this case, Kansas—would vote on whether they wanted to enter the Union as a free or slave state prior to submitting their application for statehood. Douglas believed this would be an acceptable compromise that would end the stalemate without him having to declare his position on the slavery issue.

Southerners supported the measure because it would effectively end the Missouri Compromise and give them the possibility of adding new slave states in an area where they had previously been prohibited. For southerners, popular sovereignty was an affirmation of their long-held theory of states’ rights; that is, the people in a state, or in this case a territory, have the right to decide whether slavery will or will not be legal. Moderate northerners, seeking a compromise to end the growing crisis, rallied behind Douglas to ensure passage of the measure, but the growing antislavery faction in the north regarded this as a sellout and was ruthless in its condemnation of Douglas, whom some labeled a traitor. Opponents took to referring to the principle as “squatter sovereignty.”

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading