U.S. History

Chapter 18: A Divided NationSection 3: Political Divisions

New Divisions

• Republican Party

– Formed in 1854

– Formed by Whigs, Democrats, Free-Soilers, & abolitionists

– Opposed extension of slavery in the West

New Divisions

• Kansas-Nebraska Act divided Democratic & Whig parties

• Northern Democrats lost many Congressional seats

• Disaffected Whigs & Democrats join Know-Nothing Party

New DivisionsElection of 1856

Millard FillmoreKnow-Nothing Party

James BuchananDemocratic Party

John C. FrémontRepublican Party

New Divisions

• James Buchanan: nominated by Democrats because he was not closely associated with the Kansas-Nebraska Act James Buchanan

New Divisions

• John C. Frémont : opposition to slavery appealed to Republicans

• Republican viewed as “single-issue” partyJohn C. Frémont

The Dred Scott Decision

•Dred Scott decision—Supreme Court ruling that denied African Americans had rights as citizens

Dred Scott

The Dred Scott Decision

• Facts:

– Dred Scott owned by Dr. John Emerson, an army surgeon

– 1830s: Emerson posted in Illinois and northern part of Louisiana Purchase

– 1846: Scott sues for freedom claiming residence in free territory made him a free man

The Dred Scott Decision

•1856: case reaches Supreme Court

•Majority of justices from south

The Dred Scott Decision

• Questions before the Court:

– Does Scott have a right to a suit?

– Does residence in free territory make Scott free?

– Is the ban on slavery in parts of the Louisiana Purchase constitutional?

The Dred Scott Decision

•Does Scott have a right to a suit?

–NO—African Americans are not citizens and therefore do not have a right to file suit in federal court

“When the Constitution was adopted, they were not regarded in any of the States as members of the community which constituted the State, and were nut numbered among its "people or citizen." Consequently, the special rights and immunities guarantied to citizens do not apply to them. And not being "citizens" within the meaning of the Constitution, they are not entitled to sue in that character in a court of the United States, and the Circuit Court has not jurisdiction in such a suit. “

—Chief Justice Roger Taney, U. S. Supreme Court

“They [African Americans] had for more than a century before been regarded as beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race, either in social or political relations; and so far inferior, that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect; and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit.”

—Chief Justice Roger Taney, U. S. Supreme Court

The Dred Scott Decision

• Does residence in free territory make Scott free?

– NO—slaves are property

– 5th Amendment: “No person shall be… deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”

The Dred Scott Decision

• Is the ban on slavery in parts of the Missouri Compromise constitutional?

– NO—slaves are property and therefore Congress had no right to ban slavery in any federal territory

“For example, no one, we presume, will contend that Congress can make any law in a Territory respecting the establishment of religion, or the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press, or the right of the people of the Territory peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government top the redress of grievances.”

—Chief Justice Roger Taney, U. S. Supreme Court

“The rights of property are united with the rights of person, and placed on the same ground by the fifth amendment to the Constitution, which provides that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, and property, without due process of law. And an act of Congress which deprives a citizen of the United States of his liberty or property, merely because he came himself or brought his property into a particular Territory of the United States, and who had committed no offence against the laws, could hardly be dignified with the name of due process of law. “

—Chief Justice Roger Taney, U. S. Supreme Court

The Dred Scott Decision

•Reaction

–Southerners cheered

–Northerners fear slavery will spread past territories

“We shall lie down pleasantly dreaming that he people of Missouri are on the verge of making their state free; and awake to the realty, instead, that the Supreme Court has made Illinois a slave state.”

—Abraham Lincoln, 1858

The Lincoln-Douglas Debates

• Abraham Lincoln

– Longtime Whig

– Republican who wanted prevent the spread of slavery

– Nominated for Senate in 1858

Abraham Lincoln

The Lincoln-Douglas Debates

• Stephen Douglas

– Represented Illinois since 1847

– Well known for Kansas-Nebraska Act

Stephen Douglas

The Lincoln-Douglas Debates

Lincoln stated he believed slavery to be wrong in the Lincoln-Douglas Debates

The Lincoln-Douglas Debates

•Freeport Doctrine—Stephen Douglas’ assertion that only citizens of a state or territory should decide the status of slavery in that state or territory

The Lincoln-Douglas Debates

•Douglas won Senate seat

•Lincoln propelled to national spotlight