Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Ditto

“It simply permitted it if the state wanted it.”

Which is what applied to Nebraska and Kansas too, didn’t it. Popular Sovereignty.


690 posted on 03/18/2013 12:17:39 PM PDT by JCBreckenridge (Texas is a state of mind - Steinbeck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 689 | View Replies ]


To: JCBreckenridge

Except that wasn’t the agreement reached in the Missouri Compromise. It specifically said that slavery was prohibited north of the line. No “popular sovereignty,” just banned in the same way the Northwest Ordinance had banned slavery in the Northwest Territories in 1787. The problem came when the south realized that there were going to be more states joining the union north of the line than south of the line and wanted to renege. Stephen Douglas pushed the “popular sovereignty” idea in Kansas as a way to finesse a slave state into the union, preserving the south’s eroding power.


691 posted on 03/18/2013 12:57:54 PM PDT by Bubba Ho-Tep ("More weight!"--Giles Corey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 690 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson