Textbook
Bleeding Kansas (Garraty, 1998)
John A. Garraty and Robart A. McCaughey, eds., The American Nation: A History of the United States (New York: Harper & Row, 1998), 406.
By denouncing the free-state government located at Topeka, President Pierce encouraged the proslavery settlers to assume the offensive. In May they sacked the antislavery town of Lawrence. A psychopathic Free Soiler named John Brown then took the law into his own hands in retaliation. In May 1865, together with six companions (four of them his sons) Brown stole into a proslavery settlement on Pottawatomie Creek in the dead of the night. They dragged five unsuspecting settlers from their rude cabins and murdered them.
Lincoln-Douglas Debates (McPherson, 2001)
Textbook
James M. McPherson, Ordeal by Fire: The Civil War and Reconstruction, 3rd ed. (New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 2001), 119.
In any case, the voters of Illinois divided almost evenly in the election. Pro-Douglas candidates for the legislature polled heavy majorities in the southern half of the state, 125,000 votes, the Douglas Democrats 121,000, and a handful of anti-Douglas Democrats, 5,000. But Douglas carried a larger number of counties, which preserved the Democratic majoirty on the joint ballot in the legislature and enabled the party to reelect him. Elsewhere in the free states, the Democrats suffered another calamity. Their fifty-three Northern congressmen were reduced to a paltry thirty one.
Abraham Lincoln to Stephen A. Douglas, July 29, 1858
Scanned by
Library of Congress
Notes
Sized and adjusted for use here by John Osborne, Dickinson College, May 29, 2008.
Image type
document
Use in Day View?
No
Courtesy of
Library of Congress Manuscript Division
Original caption
Abraham Lincoln to Stephen A. Douglas, Saturday, July 29, 1858 (Debates)
Source citation
Abraham Lincoln Papers, Library of Congress
Source note
Page one of five page letter.
Lincoln-Douglas Debates (McPherson, 2001)
Textbook
James M. McPherson, Ordeal by Fire: The Civil War and Reconstruction, 3rd ed. (New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 2001), 118.
Douglas tried to put Lincoln on the defensive by identifying him with the abolitionists. The country could survive half slave and half free, said Douglas. It had done so from the beginning and there was no reason why it could not do so indefinitely. Popular sovereignty gave the residents of territories the choice to have slavery or not. In all remaining territories they were sure to exclude slavery, said Douglas, if given a fair choice.
Bleeding Kansas (Banks, 1991)
Textbook
James A. Banks, et al., eds., United States: Adventures in Time and Place (New York: McGraw-Hill School Division, 1999), 463.
In 1854 Congress passed the Kansas-Nebraska Act. This law allowed the Kansas and Nebraska territories to decide for themselves whether to allow slavery. Both territories were north of the Missouri Compromise Line. Slave oweners were pleased because the new law opened Kansas and Nebraska to slavery. Many Northern farmers and workers who wanted to move west opposed the law. They worried that rich Southern planters would grab the best land in these territories and use slave labor to farm it. They demanded that the western lands be "free soil".
Bleeding Kansas (McPherson, 2001)
Textbook
James M. McPherson, Ordeal by Fire: The Civil War and Reconstruction, 3rd ed. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2001), 105.
Brown led a party containing four of his sons and two other men on a nighttime raid along Pottawatomie Creek. They seized five proslavery settlers from their cabins and murdered them by splitting their skulls with broadswords. This butchery launched full-scale guerilla war in Kansas. Although shocked antislavery people in the East denied - or chose not to believe- the truth about these killings, most Kansans knew who had done them. For the next four months, hit-and-run attacks by both sides raged in Kansas and were exaggerated by the national press into full-scale battles.
Stephen Douglas to Abraham Lincoln accepting the concept of a series of debates, July 24, 1858 (Page 1)
Scanned by
Library of Congress
Notes
Sized and adjusted for use here by John Osborne, Dickinson College, May 29, 2008.
Image type
document
Use in Day View?
No
Courtesy of
Library of Congress Manuscript Division
Original caption
Stephen A. Douglas to Abraham Lincoln, Saturday, July 24, 1858 (Debates)
Source citation
Abraham Lincoln Papers, Library of Congress
Ohio Republican Committee Announces publication of the Lincoln-Douglas Debates, March 1860
Scanned by
Library of Congress
Notes
Sized and adjusted for use here by John Osborne, Dickinson College, May 29, 2008.
Image type
document
Use in Day View?
No
Courtesy of
Library of Congress Manuscript Division
Original caption
Ohio Republican State Central Committee, March 1860 (Printed Circular regarding publication of Lincoln-Douglas Debates)
Source citation
Abraham Lincoln Papers, Library of Congress
Lincoln-Douglas Debates (McPherson, 2001)
Textbook
James M. McPherson, Ordeal by Fire: The Civil War and Reconstruction, 3rd ed. (New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 2001), 117.
…for weeks, the two candidates followed each other around the state engaging in long-range debates by speaking on the same platform only days apart. Douglas finally agree to meet Lincoln in seven face-to-face debates. These debates have become part of the folklore of American history. Thousands of farmers crowded into the seven towns to listen to three hours of outdoor oratory in weather ranging from stifling heat to cold rain. The campaign took on the character of high drama.
Lincoln-Douglas Debates (King, 1986)
Textbook
David C. King et al., United States History: Presidential Edition (Menlo Park, California: Addison – Wesley Publishing Company, 1986), 271.
Douglas claimed that, although it was legal for an owner to bring a slave into any territory, citizens could refuse to enact laws protecting slavery. Without slave codes, slavery simply could not exist. Many voters were impressed with Douglas's logic. Douglas's reply became known as the Freeport Doctrine. He claimed that, although it was legal for an owner to bring a slave into any territory, citizens could refuse to enact laws protecting slavery. Without slave codes, slavery simply could not exist. Many voters were impressed with Douglas's logic.