CAMBRIDGE AS HISTORY: HISTORY OF THE USA. PAST PAPERS EXPLAINED. 2014 WINTER PAPER 1 DOCUMENT QUESTION.

1. CAMBRIDGEASHISTORY
HISTORYOFTHEUSA
PASTPAPERS
EXPLAINED
2014WINTERPAPER1
DOCUMENTQUESTION

2. PAPER 11 - NOVEMBER 2014
The Origins of the Civil War, 1846–1861
The Raid on Harpers Ferry, 1859
Read the sources and then answer both parts of the question.

3. SOURCE A
The recent insurrectionary movement on the part of a body of desperate
men at Harpers Ferry is a novelty, at least for the older states of the Union. It
is yet impossible to judge accurately the real origin and objects of the
outbreak or who is implicated in it beyond the misguided men who took
possession of the United States arsenal. But enough has been ascertained to
arouse the suspicion that it was the premature execution of a plot that had
the sympathy and, in many instances, the active support by the contribution
of money, of the leading Abolitionists of the North – a class whose humanity
would prompt the desolation of our states by fire and sword, the kindling of
civil war and even the disruption of the Union to accomplish their irrational
ideas of philanthropy.
From the New Orleans ‘Picayune’, 22 October 1859.

4. SOURCE B
As respects the attempts of an insane old man and his handful of followers,
it is easy to determine where responsibility really belongs. Their act is but a
part of the legitimate fruit of the repeal of the Missouri Compromise.
Another part of this paper includes a statement about the wrongs heaped
on Old Brown by slave states, for whose benefit the Compromise was
broken down, wrongs which entered his soul and made him what he is – a
monomaniac who believes himself to be a God appointed agent to set the
enslaved free. Upon the heads of those who repealed that Compromise,
and who sanctioned the lawless violence and bloodshed which grew out of
it on the plains of Kansas, rests the blood of those who fell at Harpers
Ferry. This chain of events makes up the blackest page of our national
history.
From the ‘Chicago Press and Tribune’, 20 October 1859.

5. SOURCE C
Hot-headed abolitionists, in various disguises and various ways, in the North
and in the South, are more active than ever in sowing the seeds of slave
rebellion and insurrectionary conspiracies. The Harpers Ferry raid is
suggestive of a dozen other abolition outbreaks of the same kind all along the
Northern line of slave states at any moment without warning. And if
Northern philanthropists and Puritanical preachers of the gospel are found,
with the orators and organs of the Republican party, glorifying Old Brown as a
saint and a martyr, is not the danger very much increased of a repetition of
this bloody Harpers Ferry foray? Above all, with such interpreters of Mr
Seward’s ‘irrepressible conflict’ as Old Brown, is it not abundantly manifest
that this terrible abolition crusade against the South has been pushed to the
last extremities of forbearance?
From the ‘New York Herald’, 4 December 1859.

6. SOURCE D
It has been discovered that the following is a portion of the plans of the
abolitionists, matured in Kansas by Brown and others and which he
attempted to carry out:
1. To make war upon the property of the slaveholders – not for its destruction
but to convert it to the use of the slaves. If it cannot be thus converted, then
we advise its destruction. Teach the slaves to burn their master’s buildings, to
kill their cattle and horses and let crops perish. Make slavery unprofitable in
this way, if it can be done in no other.
2. To make slaveholders objects of derision and contempt, by flogging them
whenever they shall be guilty of flogging their slaves.
3. To risk no general insurrection until we of the North go to your assistance
or you are sure of success without our aid.
From Felix de Fontaine, ‘History of American Abolitionism’, 1861.

7. REQUEST
Answer both parts of the question with reference to the sources.
(a) To what extent do Sources A and B agree on who or what was responsible
for causing John Brown to lead the attack on Harpers Ferry? [15]
(b) How far do Sources A to D support the assertion that people in the North
supported the raid on Harpers Ferry? [25]

8. GUIDANCEINBUILDINGYOURANSWER

9. INDICATIVE CONTENT
(a) To what extent do Sources A and B agree on who or what was responsible for
causing John Brown to lead the attack on Harpers Ferry? [15]
Both sources are critical of the actual attack on Harpers Ferry. Source A calls the
raiders ‘desperate’ and ‘misguided’ while Source B describes John Brown as ‘insane’.
Though it does not mention John Brown by name, Source A does focus on the issue of
who was responsible for causing the attack. It lays the blame for the raid on ‘the
leading Abolitionists of the North’ who, it says, provided sympathy and financial
support for the plan. In other words, Brown is something of a puppet. Source B, by
contrast, does mention John Brown. Even if it sees him as insane and a ‘monomaniac’,
Source B is more sympathetic towards Brown. It sees him as driven mad by ‘the chain
of events’ leading from the repeal of the Missouri Compromise – which was
overturned by the 1850 Compromise – to ‘Bloody Kansas’ in the mid-1850s. By
breaking the Missouri Compromise and by sanctioning the later violence in Kansas,
the slave states caused John Brown to feel such a sense of injustice that he felt it
necessary to lead the attack on Harpers Ferry as the first step in the process of
restoring justice. Thus Source A blames Northern abolitionists while Source B blames
the South, a clear contrast.

10. CONTEXT
(b) How far do Sources A to D support the assertion that people in the North
supported the raid on Harpers Ferry? [25]
The raid on the US armoury at Harpers Ferry in late 1859 was a very dramatic
incident which did much to upset the already delicate balance between North
and South. John Brown, 59 in 1859, had been a well-connected Northern farmer
and businessman who, in the 1850s, dedicated himself to the abolitionist cause.
He had become involved in ‘Bloody Kansas’, the sack of the town of Lawrence in
1856, causing him to kill people in what became known as the Pottawatomie
massacre, which in turn led to a conflict at Ossawatomie in which his son was
killed. He spent the next two years travelling the North trying to find men,
money and materiel to start military action against slavery. He hoped that
seizing the armoury at Harpers Ferry would spark slave revolts across the South.
The raid was botched. That it happened at all, however, alarmed many in the
South, especially those who feared slave rebellions. The rapid execution by the
Virginian government of the raid’s leader, John Brown, did much to anger the
North. Many abolitionists saw him as a martyr to a noble cause. Others thought
him insane to undertake a raid which was bound to fail.

11. ANALYSIS
Two sources clearly support the assertion: A and D. Source A argues that
Northern abolitionists provided support, both in words and in money. Source D
provides extracts from a plan drawn up by abolitionists to undermine slavery
by means of a series of illegal actions, including incendiarism. Both maintain
that abolitionists in the North were plotting against slavery. One source –
Source C – is less clear-cut. It argues that ‘hot-headed abolitionists … in the
North’ are active in encouraging slave conspiracies and ‘Northern
philanthropists …are glorifying Old Brown’. This is not quite the same as
supporting the Harper Ferry raid, however. Source B does not support the
assertion. It explains the raid as being a reaction against the policies of the
Southern states to tilt the balance based on the Missouri Compromise of 1820
in their favour. On the question of Northern support for the raid, however, it is
silent. Thus content analysis would suggest some strong support for the
assertion and only limited support against.

12. EVALUATION
Source A is from a Southern newspaper and thus its argument that the North did
support the raid is to be expected. Source D provides support for these arguments,
though little trust can be placed on Source D, as is shown later. Contextual knowledge
does confirm that Brown did have some support from some Northern abolitionists,
even to the extent of funding the raid. Admittedly, only a small group did so but it did
include on its outer fringes Frederick Douglass, the ex-slave and leading abolitionist.
In addition, many more Northerners did sympathise with Brown’s efforts. Source B is
a Northern source, which focuses on explaining why the raid occurred. Though it
blames the slave states of the South for bringing about a ‘chain of events’ which
provoked John Brown into organising the raid on Harpers Ferry, it is silent on the
matter of support for the raid. However, if the South is to blame for Harper’s Ferry, by
implication Northerners are not. Source C, a second Northern source, was written two
days after the execution of John Brown. It indicates Northern support for Brown ‘as a
saint and a martyr’ but makes no mention of the raid on Harpers Ferry. The way in
which Brown faced his trial and execution aroused a great deal of sympathy in the
North. The source shows great support for John Brown after the raid but none for the
raid itself.

13. EVALUATION cont.
Source D is a rather strange source. Published at the start of the civil war two
years later, it claims to be part of John Brown’s plans at the time of the raid on
Harpers Ferry. It talks of ‘John Brown and others’, arguing that the author did
see Northerners as supporting the raid. The content of the source is confusing.
According to Point 3, the author – presumably John Brown – is addressing
slaves in the South. However, Point 1 talks of slaves in the third person. In
addition, Point 1 is very muddled indeed. How can you convert the property of
slaveholders to the benefit of slaves by burning buildings, killing cattle and
leaving crops to waste? The author is a Southern supporter writing an anti-
abolitionist history, presumably to try and sway public opinion as uncivil peace
turns to civil war. And though John Brown’s exact plans varied week by week,
meeting by meeting, his main aim was not to persecute slaveholders, as Source
D suggests. Thus Source D is most unreliable. Thus on evaluation, the sources
do support the assertion, even though only a very small minority of
Northerners actually supported the raid before it occurred.

14. PAPER 12 - NOVEMBER 2014
The Origins of the Civil War, 1846–1861
The Death of John Brown, 1859
Read the sources and then answer both parts of the question.

15. SOURCE A
John Brown dies today! We have a firm belief that this execution of Brown will
hasten the downfall of that accursed system against which he waged war. The
shock caused by his death will be more than a nine day wonder. The emotions
excited and the reflections provoked by the tragedy will go to the very
foundations of our political structure. In all parts of the union, men will ask
themselves how long this institution, which compels men to put to death their
fellows like Brown, who act on motives that command the approval of the
world, shall be suffered to disgrace the age and the civilisation in which we
live. The issue will reach hearts that have been callous until now. Before many
years it will bring the opposing forces which now divide the country face to
face for a final conflict. We have no anxiety about the result, whenever it
comes.
From the ‘Chicago Press and Tribune’, 2 December 1859.

16. SOURCE B
The execution of the old man at Charlestown yesterday was a plain admission
on the part of slavery that they dare not spare a brave man’s life and that
mercy is impossible for a system based on wrong and upheld by violence.
History will do justice to the institution of slavery and its uncompromising foe
alike, when both are gone. The comparison which this affair provokes
between the two is now plainly visible to change the popular judgement.
Slavery in the fullness of its triumph and power is a failure. Old John Brown
has succeeded in dragging down the pillars of slavery in his fall and his victory
is complete! While millions of prayers went up for the old martyr yesterday so
millions of curses were uttered against the system which so mercilessly and
ferociously cried out for his blood.
From the ‘Pittsburgh Post-Gazette’, 3 December 1859.

17. SOURCE C
The chances are ninety-nine in a hundred that before this paper reaches our
subscribers John Brown will have paid the penalty of his crimes on the
gallows. It is to be hoped, with Brown’s exit, the excitement of the North will
subside. But we confess that this hope is but of the faintest character.
Fanaticism in the North is rampant and overrides everything. Only yesterday,
the godly city of Boston, built up and sustained by the products of slave
labour, went into mourning, fasting and prayer over the punishment of the
negro stealer, murderer and traitor and from fifty pulpits the Puritan
preachers belch forth volumes of blasphemy and treason. In all the New
England villages, we may expect to hear that mock funerals have been
celebrated. It is a pity that they haven’t a witch or two to drown or burn, by
way of variety.
From the ‘Raleigh Register’, 3 December 1859.

18. SOURCE D
It is pleasing to observe the reaction which is rapidly taking place in Northern
sentiment. The sympathisers with the mad act of John Brown and his deluded
followers, though few in number, made a great deal of noise at first and
almost convinced some too credulous Southern men that their ravings were a
fair reflection of Northern feeling. But now the excitement of the moment has
passed, the strong undercurrent of genuine Northern patriotism is beginning
to be felt. Conservative Union meetings are being held throughout the entire
North and are passing resolutions condemnatory of the Virginia invasion and
of all incendiary attempts to excite the slaves against their masters.
From a Kentucky newspaper, ‘The Frankfort Commonwealth’,
17 December 1859.

19. REQUEST
Answer both parts of the question with reference to the sources.
(a) Compare and contrast Sources C and D as evidence about Southern
attitudes towards the death of John Brown. [15]
(b) How far do Sources A to D support the assertion that the impact of
the death of John Brown was short-lived? [25]

20. GUIDANCEINBUILDINGYOURANSWER

21. INDICATIVE CONTENT
(a) Compare and contrast Sources C and D as evidence about Southern attitudes
towards the death of John Brown. [15]
Both Source C and Source D, from Southern newspapers, have their sights firmly
focused on the response of people in the North to the execution of John Brown.
Source C, from North Carolina, is most anxious about the effect the hanging of John
Brown will have in the North. The Raleigh Register hopes that ‘the excitement of the
North will subside’ but is far from hopeful that it will. In fact, it believes that there is
only the ‘faintest’ hope that it will. The newspaper asserts that ‘Northern fanaticism
is rampant and overrides everything’. It quotes the example of Boston, a city which
has benefited from the slave-based economy of the South, now mourning the death
of John Brown. Source D, from Kentucky, is more measured in its response to John
Brown’s death. It argues that the extreme passions which were to be heard in the
North ‘at first’, following the ‘mad act of John Brown’, have subsided. ‘A genuine
Northern patriotism’ is starting to replace sectional ‘ravings’. Source D makes no
direct reference to the execution of John Brown. However, it was written just over
two weeks after that death, during which time passions should have cooled slightly.

22. CONTEXT
How far do Sources A to D support the assertion that the impact of the death
of John Brown was short-lived? [25]
John Brown was hanged by the state of Virginia on 2nd December 1859,
following a one-week trial which finished exactly a month before. The trial
occurred just a week after the short-lived raid on Harpers Ferry. A jury found
him guilty on three charges: conspiracy to cause a slave insurrection; murder;
treason against the state of Virginia. The dignity which he showed in the last
month of his life did much to win support for John Brown and the abolitionist
cause. His final speech to the court and the many letters he wrote in his final
month impressed many who, while sympathetic to the abolitionist cause, were
critical of the raid itself. He died a hero and a martyr. He was buried in New
York State six days later. In the early months of the civil war, Northern troops
made John Brown the subject of the most famous civil war song of them all,
John Brown’s Body.

23. ANALYSIS
Source A clearly dismisses the assertion, arguing that ‘the shock caused by his
death will be more than a nine-day wonder’. The Chicago Press and Tribune
believes that the death of John Brown will affect those who ‘have been callous
until now’, i.e. indifferent to the abolitionists’ cause. In so doing, the differences
between North and South will become so great as to cause ‘a final conflict’, it is
argued. Source B sees the death of John Brown as a defeat for slavery. Though
the source does not consider how long the impact of John Brown’s death will
be, talk of ‘millions of curses’ against slavery suggests that it will not be short-
lived. Source C is extremely worried that John Brown’s death will be long-lasting
as ‘fanaticism in the North is rampant and overrides everything’. Sources B and
C together show how high passions are running in the North as a result of John
Brown’s death. This gives attitudes towards slavery more of an emotional basis
which will be hard to shift. Source D is more sanguine. It believes that passions
will subside, that Unionist forces in the North will offset the power of
abolitionist groups arguing for conflict with slave power. Thus Source D supports
the assertion. It is the only one of the four sources to do so in such clear terms.

24. EVALUATION
Two of the sources – A and B – are from the North, the other two from the
South. It is hard to deduce, however, from their origins where they would be
likely to stand on the issue of the impact of the death of John Brown. In fact,
both B (Northern) and C (Southern) think the impact will be long-lasting. More
important, perhaps, is the date of the sources. Three are written at the time of
Brown’s execution, the fourth a fortnight later. All are too close to the death to
help decide whether the impact was long-lasting. Contextual knowledge
becomes essential. Which side of the argument does that knowledge support?

25. EVALUATION cont.
Perhaps the most useful piece of knowledge is the composition of the song
John Brown’s Body in the first few months of the civil war by a battalion of
Northern soldiers. The fact that ordinary soldiers wanted to commemorate
John Brown in a war song is strong evidence that the impact of his death was
long-lasting. That this song became so popular is further evidence to challenge
the assertion. The song can be used to support the arguments of Source A,
which in 1859 maintained that the final conflict was coming. Relevant
contextual knowledge from the 1860s can also be used to challenge the
assertion. One example would be the response of the French novelist, Victor
Hugo, who in 1861 drew a picture of John Brown hanging from the gallows.
Only one source – D – argues for the assertion. The other three oppose it as
does all contextual evidence.

26. PAPER 13 - NOVEMBER 2014
The Origins of the Civil War, 1846–1861
The Compromise of 1850
Read the sources and then answer both parts of the question.

27. SOURCE A
How can the Union be saved? There is but one way and that is by adopting
such measures as will satisfy the states belonging to the Southern section
that they can remain within the Union consistently with their honour and
safety. The South asks for justice, simple justice and less she ought not to
take. But can this be done? Yes, easily; not by the weaker party. The North
has only to will it to accomplish it: to do justice by conceding the South an
equal right in the acquired territory; to do her duty by causing the
stipulations relative to fugitive slaves to be faithfully fulfilled; to provide for
an insertion of a provision in the constitution, by an amendment, which will
restore to the South the power she possessed before the equilibrium
between the sections was destroyed by the action of this government.
There will be no difficulty in devising such a provision.
From a speech by John Calhoun, Senator for South Carolina,
to the US Senate, 4 March 1850.

28. SOURCE B
Mr Calhoun has spoken! And what did he say? We cannot give the speech
entire in our columns, and would not if we could, but we will give a few
samples by which the reader can judge the lot. Mr C says that the South
‘has no concessions or surrender to make. She has already surrendered so
much that she has little left to surrender.’ We cannot take this seriously.
He concludes by saying that if California is admitted into the Union under
the constitution chosen by its own citizens, the South will regard it as a
final decision of the test question and ominously adds that they would be
‘infatuated not to act accordingly’. But we ought to ask pardon of our
readers for devoting so much space to such a speech. We regard it as
merely the last gasp of a dying monster.
From ‘The North Star’, 15 March 1850.

29. SOURCE C
Three bills will be presented. The first embraces the California question and
the Texas boundary question. The second bill amends the Fugitive Slave Law
of 1793, giving effect to the provisions of the constitution and securing their
rights to the Southern people. The third bill will extend the law of Maryland,
as it existed five years ago, over the District of Columbia, by which the
introduction of slaves for the purpose of traffic and sale is prohibited. The
plan is bold and simple. It will receive the authority of Mr Clay’s great mind.
He deserves the praise of the country for the bold and conservative stand he
has taken for the constitution and the rights of the states. A correspondent
on the Baltimore Sun says that it will receive the support of two-thirds of the
South. If so, the slavery question will be permanently settled.
From ‘The Democratic Banner’, Pike County, Missouri, 13 May 1850.

30. SOURCE D
Sir, the agitations which alarm us are not signs of evils to come but of
ineffective efforts of the Republic for relief from mischiefs past. There is a
way, and one way only, to put them at rest. While we leave slavery to the
care of the states where it exists, let us inflexibly direct the policy of the
federal government to circumscribe its limits and favour its ultimate
extinction. Let those who have this misfortune entailed upon them,
instead of contriving to maintain an equilibrium that never had existed,
consider carefully how at some time, by all means of their own and with
our aid, without sudden change or violent action, they may bring about
the emancipation of labour and its restoration to its just dignity and
power in the State.
From a speech by William Seward, Senator for New York,
to the US Senate, 2 July 1850.

31. REQUEST
Answer both parts of the question with reference to the sources.
(a) To what extent do Sources A and D agree on how the USA should address
the issue of slavery? [15]
(b) How far do Sources A to D support the assertion that the 1850
Compromise helped only to further divide the USA? [25]

32. GUIDANCEINBUILDINGYOURANSWER

33. INDICATIVE CONTENT
(a) To what extent do Sources A and D agree on how the USA should address
the issue of slavery? [15]
Source A argues that the issue of slavery is best addressed by making
concessions to the South. Three are specified: equal rights in ‘the acquired
territory’, i.e. the Mexican Cession; the proper enforcement of Fugitive Slave
law; a constitutional amendment restoring equilibrium between North and
South. The first means the possibility of slavery being established in new
territories and states such as California. Source D believes the better approach
is to contain slavery within its existing limits. Thus the federal government
should allow slavery no chance to establish itself in the new territories and
states. This is in complete opposition to the first demand made by Source A.
Source D also indirectly attacks Source A’s third proposal when it rejects the
idea of maintaining an equilibrium between North and South. Source D
believes such a balance never existed in the first place. On the fugitive slave
law, Source D is silent.

34. CONTEXT
(b) How far do Sources A to D support the assertion that the 1850 Compromise
helped only to further divide the USA? [25]
The 1850 Compromise was a complex series of laws and policies which involved both
sections making some concessions – as was an essential part of the US political
process. It was necessary because the acquisition of new states and territories in 1845–
48 upset the delicate balance between slave and non-slave states. Agreeing the
Compromise was a long and difficult process. The North conceded a new Fugitive Slave
law, harsher than its predecessor, which the South expected Northern states to uphold
thereafter. The South conceded the entry of California into the USA as a free state – it
had wanted the state divided – and the abolition of the slave trade in Washington DC.
Both compromised over the territories of New Mexico and Utah: the North abandoned
the Wilmot Proviso, the South conceded the principle of popular sovereignty. The
South had conceded something which they could not affect thereafter – the
governance of the new lands – in order to make gains with regard to the treatment of
fugitive slaves, which were to prove illusory. The North had conceded something – a
harsher Fugitive Slave law – the success of which depended upon its cooperation.
Many Northern states refused to cooperate. In effect, the expansion of slavery which
the South hoped for did not materialise, despite their fiercest efforts in Kansas.

35. ANALYSIS
Source A argues that the proposed Compromise need not cause further
division of the USA so long as at its heart was a series of concessions to the
South. Source B is a commentary on Calhoun’s speech. It is a very critical
commentary. It explains the implications of the speech, namely that if the
concessions were not made by the North, then the South would have ‘to act
accordingly’. What that action might be is not spelt out. Secession might be
one possibility. Source C supports the assertion, arguing that the complex set
of three measures, with the backing of Senator Clay, should be acceptable to
the South and thus settle the various issues dividing North and South. Source D
argues that the Compromise might work so long as it involves no concessions
to the South, i.e. is no compromise. Sources A and D are in complete contrast
to each other. Source B dismisses Calhoun. Source C is the most positive of the
four.

36. EVALUATION
Senator Calhoun, the author of Source A, was the leader of the Southern
Democrats. His speech of 4th March 1850 was his last major speech. (He was
so frail, the speech had to be read out for him. Within a month he was dead.)
After forty years in politics, by 1850 Calhoun was increasingly pessimistic about
the future of the South within the USA. This extract from Calhoun’s speech,
relatively optimistic, is untypical of the whole speech. And though the South
did gain one of his three demands, over fugitive slaves, the other two were
ignored. Calhoun was out of touch with the new political realities. Source B
illustrates this latter point. The great Southern statesman is dismissed as a
‘dying monster’, which is a little cruel. The North Star was an abolitionist
newspaper established in 1847 by the ex-slave Frederick Douglass to represent
the views of ex-slaves. The newspaper was bound to criticise a Southern voice
on the 1850 Compromise. The North Star would probably see the Compromise
as irrelevant to the greater division within the USA, between freeman and
slaves. Source C, from a newspaper in the slave state of Missouri, is optimistic
about the chances of a settlement.

37. EVALUATION cont.
That optimism is based on two things. The first is the support for the
Compromise of Mr Clay, i.e. Senator Henry Clay of Kentucky, one of the
triumvirate of US political leaders of Congress in the 1830s and 1840s. (The
others were Calhoun and Webster, representing the South and North
respectively.) The second is a report from another newspaper about the state
of opinion in the South. Clay was certainly key to agreeing the Compromise. A
hearsay report of Southern views is not that reliable. The arguments of Source
C are not that soundly based. Source D is from the leading abolitionist
Senator, who would be firmly set against any compromise short of abolition.
Thus his interpretation must be heavily discounted. All sources have their
limitations. After many months, the Compromise was agreed. Its
implementation in the 1850s did help to further divide the USA. In 1850,
however, when the sources were written, it was possible to be optimistic.
Source C is the least unreliable of the four, it can be argued.