The Bleeding Kansas

The Bleeding Kansas
America has had a bloody rise to the great nation it is today, and that continuous battle has forged it into a strong nation that has been a shining star
for many years. The greatest war in American history was, without a doubt, the Civil War. It cost more than 600,000 lives on both sides, ultimately
spilling American blood no matter who won how many battles. But before all of this, another fight was carrying on. It was fought for nearly
identical reasons, only on a smaller scale. The Bleeding Kansas was a fight over the decision to make Kansas a slave state or a free state. It was
brought about by the Nebraska–Kansas Act, put forth by Senator Stephan A. Douglas. The decision to leave the choice up to popular sovereignty led to
the early clashes... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Hundreds marched north from mostly Missouri stake their claim on the land and to try to create and enforce a slave friendly government. At the
same time, thousands of Missourians were crossing the border to vote for a proslavery delegate to represent them, and they won the election. March
30, 1855, another election took place to elect members for a territorial legislature. Again, Southerners poured over the border to vote. Now that the
proslavery politicians held the power they enacted what was labeled the "Bogus Law" by the Northerners. The law enacted Missouri slave laws in
Kansas that banned anyone from speaking, or writing against slavery, and if anyone was caught helping a slave escape, they would be hung or put in
prison for ten years. The Northerners found these laws completely and uncompromisingly wrong and biased. To combat this "Bogus Law", the
Northerners in Kansas established their own Free Legislature in Topeka, which would become the state capitol eventually. Highly contradictive of each
other, the two governments held similar power; however Democratic President Pierce only recognized the government from the South. This dire
situation escalated for some time until May of 1856 when the bloodshed began (Africans in
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

Essay On Bleeding Kansas
Bleeding kansas, a conflict that took place in the territory of the Louisiana purchase.
People fought over slavery in 1854–1861, towns were destroyed and many people were killed. It precluded to the Civil War and the compromise was
the Kansas–Nebraska act.
There was conflict in the Kansas Nebraska territories due to slavery. Opposing governments were made in 1855, one government was pro slavery the
other was anti slavery. These two parties clashed over slavery. Pro slavery people shipped goods and supplies into the Kansas territory trying to help
their side win the conflict.("Bleeding Kansas"). In the following months new leaders were appointed to both sides of the government. The fighting got
to the point where federal troops ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Population grew due to people trying to influence the decision.("Bleeding Kansas"). Surrounding the pro slavery towns with anti slavery camps to trap
and basically starve them. People tried starting towns but some were burned right after their birth.Which destroyed Kansas's economy("Bleeding
Kansas"). How Bleeding Kansas influenced the economy of the territory is,this constant conflict only deteriorated the economy.The plundering of
towns that cost thousands to repaired made the economy sick. Also Missourians crossed the border of the Kansas territory and took over polling
towns. They made it to were anti slavery people couldn't vote for government,even with their efforts a pro slavery government was elected
anyway.("From the Kansas–Nebraska"). What happened at the Harper's Ferry raid was John Brown lead small group raids against armories in
Harper's Ferry he led them 5 times hoping to start slave riots but none of his goals came true.He soon became desperate that he and his 5 sons went
from his home to a couple of cabins were they attacked men and killed 5 of them starting many conflicts in the territory over the summer and many
more died("From the

A Description of Bleeding Kansas
Unit 2 Dcush test review
Study online at quizlet.com/_4x96e
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
"Bleeding"
Kansas
A sequence of violent events involving abolitionists and pro–Slavery elements that took place in Kansas–Nebraska Territory. The dispute further
strained the relations of the
North and South, making civil war imminent.
10% Plan

This was Lincoln 's reconstruction plan for after the Civil War. Written in 1863, it proclaimed that a state could be reintegrated into the Union when
10% of its voters in the
1860 election pledged their allegiance to the
U.S. and pledged to abide by emancipation, and then formally erect their state governments. This plan was very lenient to the South, would have meant
... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
He opposed radical Republicans who passed
Reconstruction Acts over his veto. The first
U.S. president to be impeached, he survived the Senate removal by only one vote. He was a very weak president.
14.
Spain ceded Florida to the United States and gave up its claims to the Oregon Territory
Andersonville
13.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
Daniel
Webster
Senator who, originally pro–North, supported the Compromise of 1850 and subsequently lost favor from his constituency, noted orator, constitutional
lawyer, senator, secretary of state, and major spokesman for nationalism and the union in the 1830s, 1840s, and 1850s.
22.

David Wilmot
Democrats
their philosophy war the stamp of Andrew
Jackson, believing the federal government should be limited in power, except to a degree that it worked to eliminate social and economic arrangements
that entrenched privilege and stifled equal opportunity.
United States abolitionist who escaped from slavery and became an influential writer and lecturer in the North (1817–1895)
Frederick
Douglass
one of the most prominent african american figures in the abolitionist movement. escaped from slavery in maryland. he was a great thinker and
speaker. published his own antislavery newspaper called the north star and wrote an autobiography that was published in 1845.
Ft. Sumter
place in South Caroline where the first shots were fired in the Civil War; event that

The Assassination Of John Brown
There are many definitions of terrorism and no one can be completely certain what it really means. Despite his actions at Pottawatomie Creek and
Harper's Ferry, John Brown certainly had legitimate reasons to carry out his attacks. Throughout his childhood, John had learned to be against
slavery. His father was a deeply religious man who believed owning people was against God's word. Even as a child and teenager John was mature,
enough to be an adult. So when he saw slaves beaten by their owners, he knew it was wrong. As a teenager, John proceeded to become closer to the
lord. Soon John was an adult and still believed that slavery was wrong. The murder of Elijah P. Lovejoy set John over the edge and he vowed that he
would end slavery. In the years that followed, John Brown's vow became unfulfilled. Despite his concern on slavery, John had much more ... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
When they made it, they rested up for a while before finally acting. As they were making their way across a railroad. A person, recognizing John,
ran off to try to warn the others. John's men shot to kill. What is ironic about that situation? The first man they killed in Harper's Ferry was a free
black man. Having no remorse over the dead, John kept tromping onward. He took over Harper's Ferry as planned but no slaves came to help. In
fact, the slaves were among the ones to be horrified at John's actions. Eventually, the military came and wiped out all of John's men including two of
his sons. John was captured and had to be brought on a stretcher to his hearing. They announced him guilty of all his crimes and he was later
sentenced to be hanged. John's actions caused a ripple throughout the north. Northerners looked up to him as a hero. He inspired the north to make
their moves to stop slavery. He showed them that if one man can stand up to slavery imagine what would happen if all the north stood up too. John
Brown was a freedom

Analysis Of Stephen A. Douglas
Stephen A. Douglas was born in 1813. He was born in Vermont, he studied law in New York, and in 1833 he moved to Illinois where he would
become a resident and be part of major changes in history there. This state is where Douglas really found his home. Douglas was a politician in the
United States, a Democratic Party leader and an orator. Andrew Jackson influenced Douglas greatly, and Jackson really grabbed Douglas's attention
and interest. Douglas ended up building his career as a Jacksonian. He helped to organize the Democratic Party in Illinois. In this state, he introduced
party committees and nominating conventions. He also pushed for party discipline and party consistency. He was very popular, especially with the
local farmers. Many people that he was popular with had actually migrated from the South. Although Stephen A. Douglas wasAbraham Lincoln's
opponent in many debates, Douglas was still very popular and was actually re–elected senator of Illinois. But, Lincoln did end up beating Douglas in
the presidential election just two years after Douglas had been reelected as senator. Despite the presidential defeat, Douglas was still able to use his
popularity to his advantage, and this is what helped him to develop a well–established Democratic organization.
During the Mexican war, slavery became a political issue. Douglas was now going to be faced with some new challenges. He was in fear that the issue
of slavery might upset the public. He thought that the idea of

Violence Between Anti-Slavery And Bleeding Kansas
6.Bleeding Kansas–During the settling of the Kansas territory the period of violence between anti–slavery settlers and pro slavery settlers was called
"Bleeding Kansas". John Brown was the leader of the anti–slavery party and he would kill people for the cause such as his planned raid on Harpers
Ferry. He was one of the first non–African Americans to put his life on line for the cause of removing slavery 7.Manifest Destiny– Manifest Destiny
originated in the 1840s and it was the idea that expanding westward was the Anglo–Saxon Americans God given right and it embodied the American
Dream of liberty and individual economic opportunity. Many important figures used it such as John Quincy Adams in his presidential campaign.
8.Mexican American

Who Was John Brown?
Who was John Brown? What does he represent? How has he been viewed through the ages? What is his status today? This paper seeks to explore the
institution of human bondage in antiquity, during the life and times of John Brown and how his religious fever and violent conduct influenced his
contemporaries, and the lasting effect of his actions and beliefs.
In his time, John Brown was comparatively viewed as a criminal who was killed for his acts of treason and murder and as an anti–slavery freedom
fighter. He is viewed as a controversial figure who fought against slavery, but by questionable means.
Brown believed that armed force was the only way to end slavery. Today, he is perceived as a hero in some circles and as America's first terrorist in
others. People's views of Brown differ based upon their own ideology. John Brown was viewed as a radical abolitionist who was to try and free
slaves. The acts of John Brown were seen as treason during the 1850s. In order to understand the perception of Brown, then and now, one must examine
the history of slavery and its status as a legal institution ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The first part is the natural slave's existence and characteristics. The second part is the natural slaves in society and how they interact with his or her
master. According to Aristotle, natural slaves' main features include being pieces of property, tools for actions, and belonging to others. This quote
shows that slaves were not seen as human beings but as pieces of property that belonged to an owner. An enslaved man or woman could have been
sold and worked to death like a horse or any other

John Brown Martyr
Some believed that John Brown was a maniac more than a martyr, but history proves that he was more of a martyr. John Brown believed that all men
should be considered equal and have the right to freedom. Beginning in his early childhood and all the way though his life, he had a passion to abolish
slavery. Learning from a young age, that all men should have the right to freedom and equality, started a fire inside ofJohn Brown. This was a burning
passion to help free slaves and make the world a better place. John Brown was born in Torrington, Connecticut on the 9 of May in 1800. John Brown's
parents were Owen and Ruth Brown. John had 6 siblings, and he was the 3rd oldest among the 6. Growing up Owen Brown taught his children of the
Calvinists ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
On July 2, 1859, John Brown arrived in Harpers Ferry, but he is identified as Isaac Smith, Nelson Hawkins, and Shabel Morgan. Shortly after getting
to town, John Brown rents out an old isolated farm house that was 5 miles northwest of Harpers Ferry. This farm house was well known as the
Kennedy farm. Soon after he starts to get an army of abolitionist together to prepare for the raid on Harpers Ferry. Brown's daughter Anne and
daughter–in–law came to help John at the Kennedy farm. They help with the housekeeping, such as the cooking and cleaning. The raider, or the
men who came to help Brown, had to be kept up in the attic of the Kennedy farm, so nobody would see them. The men that hid in the attic were of
many different races and colors. Many of whom that came to help Brown were his family members. A plan called "the drill manual," was made by
the name Hugh Forbes. This was the plan for the raid that would free the slaves, which included guerilla warfare. Forbes quits in August after
realizing what a crazy idea this was. The raid on Harpers Ferry was founded by the secret six which include, Samuel Gridley Howe, Thomas
Wentworth Higginson, George Stearns, Franklin Sanborn, Theodore Parker, and Gerrit Smith. On October 16, 1859, John Brown starts his raid on
Harpers Ferry. First he take his men and his wagon that contains pikes and sharp carbines, and starts heading to town. First he has John Cook and

United States Rights Vs. Federal Rights
After Independence from Britain, the southern and northern sections of the United States began to separate as they aged, mainly due to conflicts of
interests. Even during the creation of the Unites States constitution, the founding fathers debated slavery. Slaves were considered 3/5ths of a person
when regarding representation based on population. This lessened the amount of seats southern states would hold in the House of Representatives,
lessening their influence on political matters before the civil war. The Northerners had a heavier influence on laws, leading to the passage of laws in
their favor. The Northern section of the United States of America became focused on manufacturing while the southern sections became dependent on
agriculture, mainly cash crops harvested by slave labor. Although the States rights versus Federal rights conflict played a role in the cause of the Civil
War, a major contributing factor was the institution of slavery and how it should be implemented in the United States. The issue of slavery in the
Western Territories was debated since the acquisition of new territory from Mexico after the Mexican–American War. The Wilmot Proviso was
introduced to prevent slavery from expanding into any territory gained from the Mexican Cession. The Wilmot Proviso never passed and compromise
between slave states and free states was not reached until the compromise of 1850, which was negated by the Kansas–Nebraska Act in 1854. The
Fugitive Slave Act,

A Brief Biography of Sam Houston
Sam Houston was a prominent political figure in the 19th century whose fame is attributed to his role of bringing Texas into the United States. Even
though he was a life–long slave owner, Houston was opposed to the expansion of the institution of slavery into the west. Despite that his attitude
seemed contradictory, Houston had good reasons for his resistance of the expansion of slavery. The issue of western expansion was an important topic
in the middle of the 19th century, and with the admittance of new territories, there was the controversy on whether or not new western territories
should be admitted to the Union as slave states or free states. Sam Houston was supportive of western expansion, but he was not supportive of the
spreading of slavery. Houston's opposition came to Congress in the form of a bill in 1854. The Kansas–Nebraska Act was proposed, and it repealed the
Missouri Compromise, which put a ban on slavery above a line called the 36 В°30 line. The Kansas–Nebraska Act applied a concept called "popular
sovereignty", which let the voters of each territory decide whether or not it would be admitted to the Union as a slave or a free state. Houston stood
against his political party and voted against it, which outraged Southerners. Houston's attitudes towards slavery may seem contradictory because he
was, after all, a slave owner, but despite popular belief, he did not oppose the institution of slavery. Houston defended slavery as a necessity because
the South

Civil War: The Missouri Compromise And Kansas-Nebraska Act
Civil War Argument Paper The Civil War was the deadliest war in American history. In total almost 800,000 Americans were killed, more than the
number killed in the American Revolution, World War 1, World War 2, and Vietnam combined. But what led to Americans fighting other Americans.
They Civil War was fought over a topic that had been in controversy for years, slavery. Many decisions were made about slavery before the civil war,
many of them controversial. The Missouri Compromise and Kansas–Nebraska act were the main events that tore the nation apart and caused the Civil
War. During the years leading up to the civil war, the issue of slavery was the main focus of most politicians. The people in the North were
anti–slavery and wanted slavery to be gone forever. The people in the South, some who owned slaves, thought that slavery was a okay and that it
should be legal. One of the first laws passed that had to do with slavery was the Missouri Compromise in 1820. In early 1819, Missouri applied to
become a state of the union. At this time, there were 11 states that allowed slavery and 11 that did not. This balance was crucial because it meant that
there was equal representation in congress for both sides. But Missouri would become a slave state, tipping the balance in favor of the South. To address
... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Although the Civil War was the worst war in U.S. history, many people, including presidents, thought that it would have to happen for the issue of
slavery to be solved. John Adams said, "If the union must be dissolved, slavery is precisely the question on which it ought to break," (John Adams).
Although the war killed thousands of Americans, it set thousands free, breaking the chains that bound African Americans to their

The Dred Scott Trial, Bleeding Kansa
The Civil War had many things that contributed to the start of it such as slavery. Events like The Underground Railroad, Missouri Compromise,
Nat Turner Rebellion, compromise of 1850, Uncle Tom's Cabin, the Dred Scott trial, Bleeding Kansa, John Brown Raid, Abe's Election and the
Battle of Fort Sumter. All of these events had key factors, even the smallest things add up. Whether it be an uprising or even a book might change
the views or opinions that you have on slavery. What if it supported your views would you want to share with others in hope to change others
thoughts or feelings? What if you were a Southerner and Abe had become President... would you fear of what might happen to your slaves? What
if you were part of the Dred Scott Trial what side would you be on? The Underground Railroad which many of you have heard the term before in
your history classes was actually started around 1780. The Civil War started in 1861 many years later this passage contributed to the war. The
Underground Railroad was a word that was used to describe a network of places to meet, unknown routes, passages and safe homes used by slave
to escape into Canada from the United States for freedom. The Railroad was estimated to free 1,000 slaves a year in total the freed an estimated
100,000 between 1810 and 1850. The "conductors" of the railroad would act as a slave and go on the plantation and would convince slaves that they
were slaves and could be free with their help but they would need to do as

John Brown 's Influence On The Commencement Of The Civil...
To what extent did John Brown's influence in Kansas play a role in the commencement of the Civil War? John Brown was a radical, Connecticut–born
abolitionist who believed the most effective method of ousting the slavery system to be an incredibly violent and aggressive one. His inclination
towards vindictive rebellion at the volatile time that surrounded the impending revolution begs the question: to what extent did John Brown's influence
in Kansas play a role in the commencement of the Civil War? As an evaluation of the Civil War instigation, John Brown's robust abolitionist
background and activist nature will fall under meticulous scrutiny. In reviewing this inquiry, encyclopedia entries, biographical accounts, historical
narratives, and journal articles are all used in order to provide relevant information and support. One of these sources is Midnight Rising. Written by
Pulitzer Prize–winning national reporter Tony Horwitz, it is part biography, part historical narrative. It surrounds John Brown's abolitionist career
as well as the events prior to and following the raid on Harper's Ferry, which Horwitz argues to be the raid that kindled the civil war. His purpose
behind this text was to illustrate, in great detail, John Brown's life as well as to explain how the raid at Harper's Ferry was especially responsible for
precipitating the Civil War. This book provides valuable background information on everything from Kansas conflict to opposing forces of Brown's

Slavery American Slavery
During the period between 1800 and 1865, slavery was a key part in the economic, political, and social development of the American South. Slavery
was often referred as the backbone to the southern lifestyle, which made many southern plantation owners wealthy and powerful. In this essay, I will be
discussing the many ways slavery played a vital role in the development of the south into a powerful economy and I will also discuss how slavery
led to the the destruction of the of the southern states after the Civil War. Slavery was very important to the southern economy. Slavery was regarded
as the economic foundation of not only the South, but of America. Eli Whitney's invention of the cotton gin made the cotton market explode, by
creating a machine that allow for the quick and easy separation of cotton fibers from their seeds. This invention made it possible to grow large
amounts of cotton. Even though the cotton gin required less slaves to operate it, it made growing cotton more profitable. This led to the development
of more cotton plantations across the south. The increase of cotton based farms increased the requirement of the number of slaves required .
Therefore, the slave population in the south grew from approximately 700,000 in 1790 to around 3.2 million in 1850. Slave labor began to produce
two–thirds of the world's cotton supply and up to 80% of the British market by 1860. Slavery and the cotton gin transformed the South into a world
agricultural powerhouse. After

Causes Of The Missouri Compromise
The Missouri Compromise caused some of the biggest conflicts in United States history. One of the biggest conflicts caused by the Missouri
Compromise was the Civil War. The Missouri Compromise was passed forty–one years before the Civil War happened. It caused the disagreement
between the north and the south of the United States on the issue of slavery. The north did not like slavery and the south did. The Missouri
Compromise was written by Henry Clay and both people who promote slavery and people who are against slavery agreed to it in Congress. The
Missouri Compromise was passed on 1820 agreeing to Missouri to be a slave state and Maine as a free state. It also banned slavery in the Louisiana
Territory north from the latitude line which was 36 degrees and 30 minutes. The compromise stayed a law until it was cancelled by the
Kansas–Nebraska Act of 1854. The Kansas–Nebraska Act of 1854 allowed slavery in the Kansas Territory and the Nebraska Territory. The
Kansas–Nebraska Act of 1854 also allowed future states, joining the union, to choose to allow slavery or not to allow slavery through voting. After the
Missouri Compromise was canceled the north saw it as the Congress was allowing the south more control in Congress which they didn't like. The
cancellation of the Missouri Compromise caused the anti–slavery Republican party. Most Americans didn't have a problem with the Missouri
Compromise and were happy because they saw it as delaying the Civil War. The rest of the

The Rise Of The Civil War
The time period of the 1850 's were the years leading up to Civil War in which many events took place that changed America. Many factors contributed
to influencing the Civil War. The three major factors leading up to the Civil War were the Fugitive Slave Act, the Kansas
– Nebraska Act, and the
anti–slavery violence of John Brown. All of these significant events changed American in either one way or another. Growing tensions between the
North and the South led to major factors during the 1850s. The Fugitive Slave Act, the Kansas– Nebraska Act, and John Brown marked a turning point
in American history which ultimately led to the Civil War. Fugitive Slave Act took place in 1850, the Kansas
– Nebraska Act was in 1854 and then John
Brown came into play in 1859. Even though these events might not be the most factorable in the time leading up to the Civil War, they are most
defiantly important. The Fugitive Slave Act in 1850, added stringent amendments to law that was passed earlier, including that citizens had to
assist with finding runaway slaves or else they will face serious consequences. Citizens who assisted a fugitive slave could be fined or imprisoned.
This law required citizens to turn in slaves if they find them and or if they know them. The judge just needs one person to say that the "slave" is
really a slave in order for them to be brought back to their landowners. Even if they are not slaves and a citizens tells the judge they are, they have to
go back to being a slave.

Violence And Its Effects On The United States Essay
Violence is a necessary proponent to history. Without violence we as human species would struggle to evolve and the United States would currently
not exist. In the decade preceding the civil war, sectional and political tensions regarding the expansion of slavery into new territories grew larger. With
the emergence of the Republican Party in the mid ninetieth century, the United States experienced a sectional pull between those who were pro–slavery
Democrats, and those who were anti–slavery expansion Republicans. Emotions regarding the expansion of slavery yielded barbaric acts across the
country including the canning of Charles Sumner, the hanging of John Brown, and the violence that construed in the Kansas territory. Each of the
victims were white, were antislavery, and fell victim to the violence of a pro–slavery Democrat outraged by their actions. These acts of violence
swayed many Democrats voters to the Republican Party setting the platform for success for Republican Presidential Candidate Abraham Lincoln who
won the election of 1860 with 180 electoral votes to Southern Democratic candidate Breckenridge 's 72. After the Congressional passing of the
Kansas–Nebraska Act, the people of the Kansas territory had the power to determine the status of their territory, free or slave, by popular vote. This
idea of popular sovereignty provoked the political tensions between northern and southern ideals and yielded extreme violence, putting Kansas on top
as the Union state with

The Role of the Kansas-Nebraska Act in the Start of the...
The Kansas–Nebraska Act was one of the most crucial events leading up to the Civil War. In 1854 the Kansas–Nebraska Act created territories for both
Kansas and Nebraska. This gave a chance for people to move slavery to the Midwest. This put the center of attention on Kansas, because this was
going to alter the balance between the North and the South. The territory we know as Kansas was better known as "Bleeding Kansas" due to all the
violent clashes between the pro– and anti–slavery parties. The Act divided the nation and directed it towards the Civil War. The Act itself virtually
nullified the Missouri Compromise of 1820 and the Compromise of 1850. The turmoil over the act split both the Democrats and the Know–Nothings,
and gave ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Congress agreed with Douglas and allowed the citizens of Kansas to decide whether or not their state would be a free or a slave state. Popular
Sovereignty did not work out as well as Douglas had hoped. Pro–Slavery settlers, mostly from Missouri, influenced territorial elections by jumping the
border and voting, claiming that they were citizens of Kansas. They formed groups like the "Blue Lodges" and became known as "border ruffians," a
term coined by avid abolitionist Horace Greeley. On the other hand, abolitionists also moved from the East with the express purpose of making
Kansas a free state. A clash between these opposing sides was inevitable. The "pro–slavery" players built and set up their first organized settlements in
Leavenworth, Atchison, and Lecompton, the territorial capital of Kansas.. The latter of these three cities became the target of much agitation, and
ended up becoming a hostile environment. Unlike the northerners moving to Kansas for colonization, the southerners moved there for violence. At the
same time, thousands of Free–Staters were attempting to settle in Kansas so that they could vote in the upcoming elections. They moved to Topeka
(where they set up their unofficial legislature), Manhattan, and Lawrence. Many of the 1,200 Free–Staters that had come to Kansas were willing to
fight for their beliefs. Armed with

John Brown 's A Hero
John Brown Essay
What John Brown did was crazy and was suicidal; he did it because he knew the purpose of it and the after effect of it. After the Harpers Ferry
revolt Brown said that he doesn't feel no guilt for his actions. He knew what people would characterize him as and he just doesn't care. He knows
what affect and toll it would take on people to see their own kind to stand up and fight for equality of a different race. Most people would think he's
crazy, but actually he's just trying to fight for justice to end slavery because what he believes that is right.
The reason why I say he 's a hero not a terrorist is because if you define a terrorist and line it up with what John Brown believes in and what he wanted
to accomplish then you would think he 's a hero also. See people got to remember the Harpers Ferry revolt wasn 't the only slave revolt John Brown
was apart of, he was also apart of other attacks in different places. For example in his "Conversation: Patriot or Terrorist" it says " During what
became known as the Pottawatomie Massacre and the Battle of Osawatomie, Brown assumed the role of abolitionist leader and led violent attacks
against proponents of slavery." See that he wasn 't just apart of one revolt and one attack like Osama Bin Laden was "no" he was part of a couple attacks
and battles. His mission was to free slaves and make the economy and country better by allowing everyone to be treated equal and have equal rights.
Like what we have sort of

Henry Clay And Henry Clay
Back in the days president and the speakers were making their own decisions, what seems right with them and not listening to the public feedback
about the situation even so they lose the voting system. There are always consequences if you're not doing something right to the world like how
Henry Clay have done by doing the separate states so then there can be slavery. Henry clay was born in Hanover County, Virginia, in 1777. He was a
speaker of the House of Representatives, he had elected John Adam to become a president. He has run for the presidency and failed couple time
so then he created a party that is named Whig Party. From there he ran again, then he have successfully won and became president of the United
States. Henry clay wanted to have slaves so then he had decided to separate states as North to be free state and South to be slave state so then there
could be farm workers for free that doing the job, after couple years later when Henry Clay passed away it led up to Bloody Kansas from his
actions that he have taken by doing free state and slave state, after Bloody Kansas was over, it led up to the Civil War to fight for free slaves also
end slavery completely. Henry Clay and his party have talked about how to set this Missouri Compromise boundary line up and see what the state
will be free also see where most farm lands are at. At the meeting they have: "Set a dividing line between future slave and free slaves... along the line
of 36' 30, latitude."(25) From this

A Speech On The Crime Against Kansas
Even on the highest level, the tension and angry spread between Senators from the North and the South. The craziest example was the "Bully" Brooks
incident of 1857. During a session of Congress the senator from Massachusetts, Senator Charles Sumner delivered a very provoking speech. His speech
"The Crime Against Kansas" was an attack against the Missourian Border Ruffians and the two senators Atchison, and Andrew Butler of South
Carolina for the "crimes" that the South had committed to gain another slave state. Unfortunately, the young, hotheaded senator Preston S. Brooks, who
happened to be Senator Butler's nephew, could not stand for these accusations. On May 22, 1856 he attacked Sumner with his eleven–ounce cane until
he it broke in... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The Democrats nominated James Buchanan, a respected Pennsylvania lawyer who had spent much time in London as of late serving as minister to
Britain. As a result, had had no hand in the quarrel and was spotless, in that respect at least. The rapidly expanding Republican party and nominated
Captain John C. Fremont. He was called the Pathfinder of the West, serving as a soldier/explorer. Will not a great political figure, he still had no part
the Kansas, which automatically made him a plausible candidate (Kennedy and Cohen). The bleeding Kansas once again showed its face in the highest
position in the land. The situation turned very dire for the anti–slavery men when the Supreme Court made the Dred Scott v. Stanford decision. The
Dred Scott v. Stanford case took place when a black slave named Dred Scott sued his master for his freedom. Dred Scott argued that he deserved
freedom because he had served his master for five years on free territory. The ruling by the Supreme Court said that since Dred Scott was a slave, his
master's private property, the Constitution did not allow the government to deprive someone of their property without due process of law. Also, as a
slave, the court could have dismissed the case then and there, but they made a ruling and took it one step farther.

Causes Of The Secession Crisis
Historians everywhere have many different ideas about why the Secession Crisis occurred. Moreover, there are many debates about whether secession
about slavery at all. Yet, the Secession Crisis was a time in which many factors came into play.
The argument being made by McPherson in Antebellum Southern Exceptionalism is that even though American Exceptionalism is a term that can be
used loosely, such was not the case for Southern Exceptionalism. Southern Exceptionalism is this idea that the period of time before, during, and after
the Civil War, the South managed to create another identity of itself, completely separate from that of the North (McPherson 41). Furthermore,
McPherson believes that the reason for the Secession Crisis is ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
He gave many examples detailing why the bill was useless, one of them being that "It is true that some southerners cherished the hope of making
Kansas the sixteeneth slave state, but even if they had succeeded, it would have been a nominal and temporary triumph gained at excessive cost"
(Fehrenbacher 90). Fehrenbacher explains how even if Kansas did become a slave state, by looking at the whole picture, it was clear that ultimately
the cons outweighed the pros. There was no point and in the end it created even more anger. Overall, historians all over the world have many ideas
as to why the Secession Crisis occurred. McPherson believes that it is because of Southern Exceptionalism, Gienapp believes it's because of the "Slave
Power," and Fehrenbacher believes it's because of the Kansas–Nebraska Act. However, though they all seem to have different ideas they all have one
thing in common: the trend. In his essay, McPherson does in fact bring up the subject of slavery. In this entire essay, McPherson only speaks briefly
about the effect that slavery had on secession, stating that "The fear that slavery was being hemmed in and threatened with destruction contributed to
the defensive–aggressive style of Southern political behavior" (McPherson 46). Furthermore, McPherson uses slavery as a way to cement the idea of
how the North and South had this difference in beliefs, rather than bringing up the discussion of slavery

The John Brown And The Pottawatomie Massacre
On May 24, 1856, John Brown and his small army of men raided Lawrence, Kansas, killing five unsuspecting civilians. The attack ended in the capture
and hanging of Brown, as the action was seen as treasonous. Since this event, debate has incessantly surrounded the figure due to the violence and
morality of the situation. Despite the lives lost, John Brown was a hero because of the reasoning of the raid and the lack of alternative options.
The event, known as the Pottawatomie Massacre, is one of honorableness since it was enacted to promote the liberty of the real victims of the time, the
slaves. To only acknowledge the five civilians as the targets would be to ignore the history of deaths in the slave community and the then current 3.2
million

Bleeding Kansas Themes
Chase Nichols History, Civics, Social Responsibility Mr. Kaufmann Movie Review The West: Episode 4 (Death Runs Riot) In the 1850's, more
American pioneers moved west, bringing with them slavery that would ignite the Civil War. Tactics that had defeated the armies of the South would
then begin to be used against the Native Americans of the West. In "Bleeding Kansas," abolitionists battle for free soil. In Utah, federal troops march
against Mormon their practice of polygamy. The war between North and South unleashes visceral savagery in the West, and leaves behind an army
prepared for total war against the Native Americans of the plains. Introductory comments suggest that the West, at least during this time, was a region
of exaggerated violence in places such as Pottawattamie... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Julia Lovejoy, an antislavery advocate who had recently moved to Kansas, provides some narrative unity for the first theme. Her letters, written to
relatives in New Hampshire, detail the horrors of "bleeding Kansas." The second theme is told effectively from the perspective of Black Kettle, the
Cheyenne peace chief, whose people were the victims of both Colonel John Chivington's massacre at Sand Creek, Colorado, and George Armstrong
Custer's 1868 attack on the banks of the Washita River. Individual segments, which could be shown separately or safely omitted, tell the stories of:
Samuel Clemens sharpening his wit in his early years as a reporter in Nevada City; and John D. Lee, who led the Mormons in a massacre of a wagon
train at Mountain Meadows. This tragic incident, controversial both then and now, is explained in the context of rising American hostility toward
Mormons, and the latter group's fears of the U.S. Army marching against them toward Salt

Was Slavery the Only Cause of the Civil War? Essay
Was Slavery the Only Cause of the Civil War?
The United States was a divided country long before the Civil War, while some people would argue that slavery was the only cause of the Civil War,
it is much more complicated than that. There are many other factors involved, such as irreconcilable differences in terms of their economic, political,
and social beliefs on a national scale. Many people including myself had a primitive and unsophisticated view of what caused the Civil War, post war
propaganda and moral righteousness have caused many people to believe that the Civil War was simply a thing of moral impurity on the part of the
South, however it is much more complicated than that. Although slavery played a major role in the Civil ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Constitutionally there were many differences between them; The North wanted a government based loosely off of the constitution where the federal
government had more power than the states, whereas the South wanted to give all the power to the states. There was The Missouri Compromise,
which added additional territories to the US after the Mexican War. The Missouri Compromise caused the Mason Dixon Line to be created, north of
the Mason Dixon Line was free states, and South of it were Slave States, this line made the North and South divided, which seemingly made them into
two separate countries.
The Southerners were at odds with the Northerners over the issue of States' Rights, the Missouri compromise was successful to an extent in solving
these problems, however it was only a temporary solution.
The Wilmot Proviso was a proposed law would have restricted slavery in all the territory that was gained from Mexico in the Mexican War, this was
the first war ever fought mainly on foreign soil, after America had won Mexico had given the majority of its territory in the U.S to the U.S.
government. This amendment was never passed because it failed in the Senate where the South had more representation. This is yet another factor that
lead to the Civil War. Had this law been passed the North would've had more representation in government, which could have lead to the

Political Parties, Sectionalism and the Civil War Essay
Everything in history seems to lead to something else. The Civil War was no exception. It started with the creation of parties. Thomas Jefferson started
the Anti–Federalist Party that would eventually evolve into Andrew Jackson's Democratic Party. Policies were issued and the two party system
started to collapse and sectionalism started to rise. Instead of Democrat versus Whig, it was North Versus South. Neither side could agree on any
issues even when compromises were issued neither side really liked the terms. Every act lead to an argument and every argument led to a compromise
which would only last for a few years. Eventually the South was tired of not getting their way and seceded from the Union. The underlying cause to
the Civil War... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Andrew Jackson started the Democratic–Republican Party. Many of his followers were from the East Coast. He was probably the most popular
president to date because he thought of himself to be a friend of the "common man". The newly created Democratic Party reached out to the common
people and in return they got involved in the party. Jackson like Jefferson believed too strong of central government would jeopardize the people's
freedom and liberty. He continued Jefferson's fight against the Bank of the United States. A bank ran by the Federal government would hurt the East
Coast at the expense of the rest of America. Issues like the Bank of the United States created sectionalism in America. Most policies Jackson issued
made sectionalism more evident. In the 1800s, politics started to change drastically. It was no longer Whigs versus Democrats but North versus South.
In every government decision sectionalism became more evident. The Wilmot Proviso is an example that shows sectionalism in the Democratic Party.
The South wanted slavery in the lands acquired from Mexico. The North was against slavery in the Mexican Territories. In the North and South,
slavery was not the only difference between them. They had very different social lives and economies. The North was very industrialized. Many
immigrants came to the North to work in factories. The influx of immigrants caused the birth rate to increase and the population to

Bleeding Kansas Essay
Bleeding Kansas
The Compromise of 1850 brought relative calm to the nation. Though most blacks and abolitionists strongly opposed the Compromise, the majority of
Americans embraced it, believing that it offered a final, workable solution to the slavery question. Most importantly, it saved the Union from the
terrible split that many had feared. People were all too ready to leave the slavery controversy behind them and move on. But the feeling of relief that
spread throughout the country would prove to be the calm before the storm.
On December 14, 1853, Augustus C. Dodge of Iowa introduced a bill in the Senate. The bill proposed organizing the Nebraska territory, which also
included an area that would become the state of Kansas. His ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
He therefore bowed to Southern wishes and proposed a bill for organizing Nebraska–Kansas which stated that the slavery question would be decided by
popular sovereignty. He assumed that settlers there would never choose slavery, but did not anticipate the vehemence of the Northern response. This
bill, if made into law, would repeal the Missouri Compromise of 1820, which said that slavery could not extend above the 36' 30" line. It would open
the North to slavery. Northerners were outraged; Southerners were overjoyed.
Douglas was stubborn. Ignoring the anger of his own party, he got President Pierce's approval and pushed his bill through both houses of Congress.
The bill became law on May 30, 1854.
Nebraska was so far north that its future as a free state was never in question. But Kansas was next to the slave state of Missouri. In an era that would
come to be known as "Bleeding Kansas," the territory would become a battleground over the slavery question.
The reaction from the North was immediate. Eli Thayer organized the New England Emigrant Aid Company, which sent settlers to Kansas to secure it
as a free territory. By the summer of 1855, approximately 1,200 New Englanders had made the journey to the new territory, armed to fight for
freedom. The abolitionist minister Henry Ward Beecher furnished settlers with Sharps rifles, which came to be known as "Beecher's Bibles."
Rumors had spread through the South

Causes Of The Missouri Compromise
In 1820, the compromise that divided the country in half and caused the biggest conflicts in the United States was born. This compromise was the
Missouri Compromise which wanted everyone happy, but at the same time wanted Missouri as a slave state so it also made Maine as a free state. The
Missouri Compromise wanted to make Missouri a slave state which caused the north to be furious due to the equality being broken between the north
and the south so the compromise also granted Maine as a free state dividing the country in half, north and south, which led to large conflicts.
The Missouri Compromise caused some of the biggest conflicts in United States history. One of the biggest conflicts caused by the Missouri
Compromise was the Civil War. The Missouri Compromise was passed forty–one years before the Civil War happened. It caused the disagreement
between the north, the anti–slavery, and the south, the pro–slavery in the United States on the issue of slavery. The north did not like slavery and the
south did. The Missouri Compromise was written by Henry Clay and both people who promote slavery and people who are against slavery agreed
to it in Congress. The Missouri Compromise was passed in 1820 agreeing to Missouri to be a slave state and Maine as a free state. It also banned
slavery in the Louisiana Territory north from the latitude line which was thirty–six degrees and thirty minutes. The compromise stayed a law until it
was canceled by the Kansas–Nebraska Act of 1854. The

John Brown Abolitionist
John Brown was an American abolitionist who believed armed insurrection was the only way to overthrow the institution of slavery in the US. Due to
to the violence he used to erase slavery he was considered a murderer/terrorist, however some believed he was a hero, since he fought against slavery.
To me John Brown was a hero and villain/terrorist. He was a man who did some things that were looked upon by some as terrorist type acts, but others
looked at those same acts as fighting against slavery.
it is quite easy to see Brown as a villain. After all, he committed a massacre in Kansas in which he brutally killed a number of men in front of their
wives and kids. In Kansas he also murdered fathers and sons, because they were from the South ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The people who thought he was a hero believed strongly in the abolitionist cause. Brown helped fight against slavery, because he believed in equal
rights, but he didn't believe there was a peaceful way to solve this, and so he used violence. I to agree with him that you needed some kind of
violence to end slavery, however he killed many innocent people which was wrong. He was someone who did lot's of very bad things, but he did
them for a clearly good cause. In John Brown's address it states "I intended, certainly, to have made a clean thing of that matter, as I did last winter
when I went into Missouri, and there took Slaves without the snapping of a gun on either side, moving them through the country, and finally
leaving them in Canada. I designed to have done the same thing again on a larger scale. That was all I intended . I never did intend murder, or
treason, or the destruction of property, or to excite or incite Slaves to rebellion, or to make insurrection." This shows Brown did at first tried to
solve slavery peacefully, but it didn't work so he moved on and used violence. Also in John Brown's address it states " I feel entirely satisfied with
the treatment I have received on my trial." This shows that Brown took up for his sins and wants to serve them. This I consider a good act, and also
he is fighting for slavery, and if you fight for slavery shouldn't that make you a hero? Even if John Brown used violence methods to end slavery he still
fought against slavery which is

The Assassination Of John Brown Essay
In 1855, John Brown went to Kansas subsequent to got notification from his children living there about the peril of Kansas turning into a slave state.
Subsequent to knowing about the sacking of Lawrence, Kansas by ace subjugation powers, Brown and his band went out of control. On May 24,
1856, equipped with rifles, blades, and broadswords, Brown and his men raged into the professional subjection settlement of Pottawatomie Creek,
dragged the pioneers out of their homes and hacked them to pieces, murdering five and seriously injuring a few others. The assault on Lawrence and
the slaughter at Pottawatomie set off a fierce guerrilla war in Kansas. Before the year's over, more than 200 individuals had been slaughtered and
property harm ventured... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Chestnut was presently viewed as a criminal in Kansas and Missouri and there was a reward for his catch. In any case, according to Northern
abolitionists, he was viewed as an opportunity contender, doing God's will. At this point, he had contrived an arrangement to go toward the South
and arm slaves to actuate a slave resistance. Many, however not the greater part of his donors knew the points of interest of his arrangements. In mid
1858, Brown sent his child, John Jr., to overview the nation around Harpers Ferry, the site of the government stockpile. John Brown wanted to
construct a constrain of somewhere around 1500 and 4000 men. Be that as it may, interior quarrels and postponements made many imperfection. In
July, 1859, Brown leased a homestead, five miles north of Harpers Ferry, known as the Kennedy farmhouse. He was joined by his little girl, little girl
in–law, and three of his children. Northern abolitionist supporters sent 198 breech–stacking, .52 bore Sharps carbines, known as "Breecher's Bibles."
Over the mid year, Brown and individuals from his family discreetly lived in the farmhouse while he enrolled volunteers for his

Manifest Destiny Civil War
"Is by the right of our manifest destiny to overspread and to possess the whole of the continent which Providence has given us for the development of
the great experiment of liberty and federative self government entrusted to us." John L. O'Sullivan, the person credited for using the words manifest
destiny for the first time, believed in spreading liberty across the nation as Americans ventured further into the lands owned by Mexico and Native
Americans. Southern ideals of manifest destiny such as slavery and cotton paralleled those of O'Sullivan himself, where "racial purity" was the key to
independence. Northerners however, varied from the south due to their abolitionist viewpoints, ultimately leading to conflict that would escalate into
the Civil War. TheUnited States expansion into western territories exposed the extent of the North and South's hostility. Heated disagreements began as
more bills and compromises ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Canals, railroads, and other pieces of infrastructure were able to strengthen the North, while disconnecting themselves from the South. The South had
no economic support other than cotton, which is why the arguments on slavery began. The North could support themselves financially without slavery,
the south could not. However, westward expansion still plays a role into this counterargument. The Louisiana Purchase occurred in 1803, marking the
true beginning of westward expansion, while 1820 to 1830 were the years where this general increase in infrastructure was seen in the North. It's still
possible to make such an argument, as the ways the North and South differed contributed significantly into future hostilities, yet the expansion west is
the reason tension had formed. In fact, most transportation methods built in the north were to connect the northeast to the upper midwest, impossible
without the Louisiana

The Pennsylvania Nebraska Act, The Missouri Bargain, Or...
Numerous individuals can contend that the primary driver of the Common War was the Kansas–Nebraska Act, The Missouri Bargain, or even the Trade
off of 1850. There are an inexhaustible measure of reasons that individuals can contend how the Common War was begun. What a great many people
don 't comprehend, that a large portion of the occasions paving the way to the Common War that individuals banter on, were identified with subjection.
Subjugation is the act of, or a framework in light of, utilizing the authorized work of other individuals (for this situation the "other individuals" were
African–Americans). At the season of the Common War, the Abolitionists (the general population that needed to end subjection most were in the north)
had numerous contentions with the South (who favored bondage). These contentions, for example, the Fringe War and John Cocoa 's Attack, made the
North and the South have rough demeanors toward each other. And afterward the "inconvenience that makes the whole situation too much to bear"
impact came into spot, and the North and the South in the long run announced war against each other. The primary driver of the Common War was
servitude as appeared by the Outskirt War, John Cocoa 's Assault, and the novel Uncle Tom 's Lodge by Harriet Beecher. One illustration that
subjection was the fundamental driver of the Common War was Draining Kansas. This is otherwise called the Outskirt War. The Fringe War was the
point at which the U.S. gave Kansas the

Sara Robinson and David AtchisonвЂ™s Roles in Bleeding Kansas
"Bleeding Kansas" had many senseless deaths and tragedies caused by the fight for slavery to either become a part of or become eradicated from the
new state, Kansas. David Atchison was a major proslavery advocate who believed that slavery needed to be expanded because of its intrinsic value in
the culture and economy of the South (Hollitz 210). Sara Robinson, on the other hand, believed that slavery was giving the South unfair political power
while simultaneously giving them an economic power that was outdated and inhibiting to the future of the United States (213). Without ever meeting,
these two influential figures went head to head in the issue of slavery and greatly influenced both of their parties. Robinson would eventually come
out with the victory along with her "free soilers" group and would blaze a trail for many more to challenge the institution of slavery. Atchison would
come to lose his battle and a portion of his great reputation and become known as the hell–raiser for his known and unknown relations with the
violence during "Bleeding Kansas." The events in Kansas seemed to bring up many issues that would come to change the face of the United States
forever. Both Robinson and Atchison grew up in wealthy families but under very different circumstances. Atchison was from Kentucky and his father
owned up to 8 slaves at one point (209). Robinson was raised in Massachusetts with an attorney for a father (212). With his charm and interest in
political issues,

Bleeding Kansas Research Paper
#4 Choices: Bleeding Kansas Bleeding Kansas was a period in time filled with violence during the settling of the Kansas territory. It was a small war
fought between proslavery and antislavery for control of the Kansas territory. "In 1854 the Kansas–Nebraska Act overturned the Missouri
Compromise's use of latitude as the boundary between slave and free territory and instead, using the principle of popular sovereignty, decreed that the
residents would determine whether the area became a free state or a slave state." (Bleeding Kansas, A&E Television Networks, 2009) People all around
came together to try to influence the decision on whether the state should be proslavery or a free state. Unfortunately, it took the turn for the worst with
brutal violence. Blood was being shed all across Kansas. It contributed to the political storm that occurred throughout the United States before the Civil
War came in to play. The start of violence with Bleeding Kansas, was the spark to what put the United states through a... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
For example, Bleeding Kansas was the start of the Civil War and the Civil War is what ended slavery, since slavery has been ended many colored
men and women have become a big part of our nation. The past eight years we have experienced our first black president, Barack Obama. Now, it is
not uncommon to see most news headlines with an African American name being the subject or even the reporter being colored. Also, most celebrities
that provide us with entertainment through TV, music, or even books are African Americans. BeyoncГ© has become a big hit to teen girls throughout
the United States. She is sending out the message that you don't have to be skinny to be beautiful, curves make you beautiful as well. She is
becoming most young teens hero because of society's image of a perfect women to be almost impossible to achieve. The world has made an evolution
to how we address and treat African

Bleeding Kansas Analysis
While the events in Kansas spurred debates in Congress and in many ways added to the growing divide between North and South, the violence did
not spread outside of Kansas and there were no large scale battles between proslavery and antislavery groups. Much of the credit for the maintenance
of relative law and order is owed to the United States Army. The Army acted as a peace keeping force between the two opposing political factions, often
called in by the Governor to assist in disbanding militias on both sides and prevent open war. Although the Army didn't participate in the Wakarusa War,
Governor Shannon recognized the Army as the instrument of the federal government to maintain law and order and to keep the peace in future
confrontations. Under Colonel Edwin V. Sumner, commander of the First Cavalry at Fort Leavenworth, the U.S. Army intervened inKansas on multiple
occasions. The Army served warrants, arrested criminals, and marched to stop both sides from slaughtering each other in large numbers. The First
Cavalry accomplished its mission without firing a single shot. According to John Garver, in his doctorate dissertation The Role of the U.S. Army in the
Colonization of the Trans–Missouri West:
The Army's ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
There is an influx of writing about the topic and I'm concerned that another thesis about it would be moot. A thesis about the US Army has a little
more strength, considering there isn't nearly as much written about it and little to no explanation as to why the Civil War didn't begin in Kansas. Part
of me agrees with Garver, robust patrolling and an armed presence kept the major violence at bay. But I feel that there are more factors that kept
Kansas relatively contained. Further research is required on the subject, especially considering my historiography primarily focuses on the motivations
and the reasons for "Bleeding

The Timeline Of Slavery In The 19th Century
Slavery first began in the 17th century, but as time went on, the situation became worst to handle. Initially, Africans were enslaved and brought to
North America. They were sold to colonists and were forced to work without making money. Slavery was permitted soon after and was most common
on plantations in the South because of the fields. People began to recognize that it was wrong and considered putting an end to it while others did not
wish to do the same which is what led to many social, economical, and political issues. The issue of slavery is the driving force for most of the political
controversies during the 19th century for many reasons. Reasons such as the cause of emotional distress, lack of freedom, and the absence of safety.
Slavery caused emotional distress among people who were abolitionists which led to horrific events. Abolitionists, in this case, are people who did not
support slavery and desired to terminate it. The act of considering these people as "property" and barely even acknowledging them as people (claimed
them to be three–fifths of a person) was unbearable for some individuals. As slaves were owned by others, they were not able to escape them, confront
them, or even act upon the choices made. Although slaves were not able to stand up for themselves, abolitionists, with the ability to do so, stood up for
them. John Brown is a significant example to this topic. As aforementioned on the John Brown Timeline of John Brown's RLAH, John Brown was an

H. Rap Brown Research Paper
H. Rap Brown was born and raised in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. In 1960, at the age of 17, he moved to Washington D.C. and joined the Non–violent
Action Group (NAG). In 1964, Brown became chairman of NAG, which eventually lead him to join the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee
(SNCC). In 1966, Brown was appointed SNCC's Director of Voter Registration for the state of Alabama. He succeeded Stokely Carmichael as national
chairman a year later. As SNCC chairman, Brown extended Carmichael's agenda to develop militancy within SNCC by alienating white members and
aligning the organization with the Black Panther Party. As leader, Brown found little succes in garnering support for his agenda because of the criminal
charges that he faced at that

The Between 1800 's And 1860 ' S
The South in one period in time became a distinct entity away from the North. It became a separate unified entity during the Antebellum Period
between 1800's and 1860's. This period introduces the idea that men wanted to make a difference in the world. An idea that a male will share is that of
absolute authority on his own plantation. One term that can be pinned down on this is that of the yeoman farmer. A Yeomen farmer strived to become
successful. Many wanted to own a huge plantation with lots of slaves. Owning a lot slaves meant that many men could relax. The term of Yeomen
Farmers is introduced by Thomas Jefferson who sets a milestone for Southerners down the road. Other then Yeomen farmers being part of the Social
class is that of women. Women in society are to be subjected to their husband. What the husband says for the to do it goes. Only one exception to this
is that if a woman is a Southern Belle. They can be further opinionatedThe South is unified by the idea of a social class, honor, and politics.
There is a class division that separates yeomen farmers and poor whites that came to sometimes became overseers of slave plantations. Poor whites
are considered low on the social hierarchy in the South. Jobs of the Overseers meant that they control slaves and overlook how slaves work. If slaves
are not productive they can get beat by these overseers. Masters often did not want to be over the punishment of the slaves. Overseers will whip a
slave if they did not keep in

How Did John Brown Trying To End Slavery
There are two main ways John Brown is remembered: he was both a murderer and a role model who fought against slavery because he believed that
fight was God's plan for him. During the mid–1800's when slavery was occurring in the United States, Brown, along with many other abolitionists
including Frederick Douglass, was trying to prevent slavery from expanding. Abraham Lincoln said during his presidential campaign in 1860 that, "
John Brown's effort was peculiar. It was not a slave insurrection. It was an attempt of a white man to get up a revolt among slaves, in which the slaves
refused to participate. In fact, it was so absurd that the slaves, with all their ignorance, saw plainly enough it could not succeed ("Cooper Union
Address")." On the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
When John Brown was a young boy growing up in Ohio, one of his earliest memories of slavery was a brutal beating of a slave boy. This gruesome
event was one of the main reasons of why John Brown wanted to fight to end slavery. The fact that he witnessed it happen also had a bigger effect on
his life than if he had only heard about it. As a grown man, Brown became known as a guerrilla fighter after the bloody Pottawatomie Massacre.
Historian Edward Renehan states that, "Kansas is the birth of the Messianic Brown, it's the birth of the Moses–like Brown, it's the birth of the murderer
Brown." In November of 1859, Brown wrote to his friend from jail after Harper's Ferry that, "You know that Christ once armed Peter. So also in my
case, I think he put a sword in my hand, and there continued it, so long as he saw best, and then kindly took it from me." This specific quote
demonstrates how strong John Brown's religious faith

The Bleeding Kansas

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to The Bleeding Kansas

Similar to The Bleeding Kansas (10)

More from Carolyn Ostwalt

More from Carolyn Ostwalt (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

The Bleeding Kansas