Preview

Caning of Charles Sumnner

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1325 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Caning of Charles Sumnner
Jorge A. Castro Professor Spero History 157 March 6, 2013

Charles Sumner: A caned champion of freedom

On May 22, 1856 the Senate was so empty that the most insignificant sound would have echoed across the whole chamber. Charles Sumner, a Massachusetts’s senator, sat at his senatorial desk by the window after a chamber meeting to write letter and read various documents. Suddenly, the light was blocked out by South Carolina senator, Preston Brooks. Brooks who entered the chamber “well protected by friends at hand” walked up to Sumner holding a Guttarpecha walking cane. As he viciously held his walking cane senator Brooks said, “Mr. Sumner, I have read your speech twice over carefully. It is a libel on South Carolina and Mr. Butler, who is a relative of mine.” 12 The inspiration for this clash came when Charles Sumner, an antislavery Republican, addressed the senate on the explosive issue of whether Kansas should be admitted to the Union as a free state or a slave state. Charles Sumner was an outspoken individual in American history; he devoted an immense amount of energy towards

1

Laurens Dawes “Makers of America” Charles Sumner. New York Dodd, Mead and Company (July 1898) p. 114 2 Curtis The Republican party: a history of its fifty years' existence and a record of its measures and leaders. The Knickerbocker press, New York (April 1904) p. 246

destroying the efforts of slave owners to take over the federal government and ensure the survival of slavery. Three days prior to Mr. Brooks’ visit, Mr. Sumner had delivered a speech in response to the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Act, a bill written by two proslavery southern senators, Andrew Butler and Stephen Douglass. Both Andrew Butler and Stephen Douglass were southern democrats who defended slavery. The passage of the Kansas-Nebraska act enraged Senators and Congressman from the northern part of the Union because it allowed both the Kansa and Nebraska territories to vote whether to enter the Union as

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Powerful Essays

    Kolko, Gabriel. The Triumph of Conservatism: A Reinterpretation of American History, 1900-1916. Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1967. Print.…

    • 2573 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The 1854 Kansas-Nebraska Act opened another battleground to the controversy. By leaving the slavery question up to popular sovereignty, Congress initiated a race between abolitionist and proslavery forces to control Kansas. Abolitionists encouraged free-soil advocates from New England and New York state to move to Kansas. Ministers like Henry Ward Beecher supported this emigration and encouraged their parishioners to help fund free-soil advocates. Meanwhile, proslavery forces urged slaveowners to relocate with their slaves. Southerners from Missouri and farther southeast made the move. The resulting conflict and bloodshed between the two groups earned the area the nickname Bleeding Kansas.4…

    • 4060 Words
    • 17 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Kansas Nebraska Act Dbq

    • 542 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The Kansas- Nebraska Act was proposed by Stephen Douglas in 1854. This Act stated that the territory of Nebraska would be split into two separate territories, Nebraska and Kansas. It also stated the people could vote on whether the territories would have slavery. This Act caused a large controversy between the people in the North and the South of the United States.…

    • 542 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Brooks was born in South Carolina in 1819 and went to the South Carolina College in 1839, which is known as the University of South Carolina today. Despite his excellent grades, he faced many difficulties at school, from terrible attendance to his infamous duels. Eventually, he was expelled and never graduated from college (Puleo). He had attended law school and became involved with the Mexican War. In fact, he served as a captain in the Palmetto Regiment, establishing his role within United States history briefly (Gienapp). In 1853, he was elected as a representative in the House of Representatives. Less known was his brother, John Hampden Brooks, who entirely supported Preston Brooks’s decision in beating Charles Sumner. Later, through letters, John expressed his glee and his wholehearted support for his brother. Yet, in reality, the incident faced much more controversy nationwide. On May 22, 1856, Brooks briskly strode into the Senate chamber and began to beat Senator Charles Sumner violently with his cane (“Commentary on 1856”). As a Democrat, his views were mainly for slavery, typical of the time. To his credit, Brooks was known as a very moderate Democrat, one willing to compromise often with the other side and stressed the need for cooperation. Newspapers had attributed characteristics like being “considerate and kind” to Brooks’s character (Puleo). But…

    • 754 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Having many enemies because of his views and after recovering from the cane beating, the Massachusetts General Court re-elected him in November 1856. They thought that his unoccupied chair in the Senate chamber served as a powerful symbol of free speech and resistance to slavery. He made quite a few speeches about slavery, including one he delivered in the months leading up to the 1860 presidential election, called "The Barbarism of Slavery." His father hated slavery and told Sumner that freeing the slaves would "do us no good" except if they were treated equally by society. With this in mind, Sumner thought that moral law and laws that made a man unable to become a greater person — like slavery or segregation — were evil. Many events made Sumner take an active role in the anti-slavery movement, including the annexation of Texas — a new slave-holding state — in…

    • 594 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    He negotiated the Act that opened Kansas and Nebraska territories for settlement. It also advocated for territorial legislatures to have the power to decide on all slavery issues (Carnes & Garraty, 2012, p.354). The Act repealed the Missouri Compromise. Northern states vehemently opposed the Act as it led to an increase in the locality of slavery. In passing the law, the nation took the greatest single step in its march towards the abyss of civil war.…

    • 962 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Kansas-Nebraska Act set the stage for what began “Bleeding Kansas” and ultimately the Civil War. As settlers began moving west of the Mississippi River, they moved into the area which is present-day Nebraska. Since the area was not yet a structured state, the people could not live there. The area that was wanted was located in a part of the United States that had outlawed slavery due to the Missouri Compromise of 1820. This, in turn, caused representatives in Congress to have no interest in creating a Nebraska territory. Senator Stephen A. Douglas was the driving factor behind the Kansas-Nebraska Act. With the goal in mind that Nebraska would become a territory, the Kansas- Nebraska Act would allow each territory the ability to choose whether or not they supported slavery. With this being enacted, it was a direct violation of the Missouri Compromise. The bill that allowed territories to decide for or against slavery, also known as popular sovereignty, split the Whig party into two different groups; the northern Whigs and the southern Whigs with the northerners organizing the Republican Party.…

    • 471 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Americans today continued to debate whether the civil war was inevitable, but there is no doubt that the Kansas-Nebraska Act made the ghastly conflict much more likely. And for that reason, it should be remembered as one of the most consequential pieces of legislation in American…

    • 921 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Stephen A. Douglas was a member of Congress since 1843 and a nationally known spokesman for the Democratic party. He was seeking reelection to a third term in the U.S. Senate, and Lincoln was challenging him for the Senate seat as a Republican. Because of Douglas’s political stature, the…

    • 749 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Civil War Bleeding Kansas

    • 452 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The Kansas Territory became the center of attention in the battle between North and South over expanding slavery into the territories. Those southerners who voted for the Kansas-Nebraska Act (splitting the territory into two areas) assumed that Kansas would enter the union as a slave state. The Republican Party, however, wanted to repeal the Kansas-Nebraska Act and restore the provision in the Missouri Compromise that prohibited…

    • 452 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Missouri Compromise

    • 274 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The Missouri Compromise was implicitly repealed by the Kansas-Nebraska Act, submitted to Congress by Stephen A. Douglas in January 1854. The Act opened Kansas Territory and Nebraska Territory to slavery and future admission of slave states by allowing white male settlers in those territories to determine through "popular sovereignty" whether they would allow slavery within each territory. Thus, the Kansas-Nebraska Act effectively undermined the prohibition on slavery in territory north of 36°30′ latitude which had been established by the Missouri Compromise. This change was viewed by Free Soilers and many abolitionist Northerners as an aggressive, expansionist maneuver by the slave-owning South, and led to the creation of the Republican Party.…

    • 274 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Kansas-Nebraska Act

    • 413 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 was a controversial legislation that opened Kansas and Nebraska to white settlement, repealed the Compromise of 1850, and led opponents to form the Republican party. This piece of legislation was introduced in Congress that revived the issues of the expansion of slavery. The Compromise of 1850 was a series of measures passed by Congress to resolve sectional tensions. Congress admitted California to the Union as a free state. And organize the territories of New Mexico, Nevada, Arizona, and Utah without mention of slavery. It also paid Texan $10 million to relinquish land claims in New Mexico and abolished the slave trade in the District of Columbia (but not slavery) while enacted a law requiring the return of fugitive slaves. (Martin 369)Douglas who pushed the Compromise of 1850, and then stated he “would never make a speech of slavery again” also proposed that the area west of Iowa and Missouri (which was set aside as permanent Indian reservation) be organized as the Nebraska territory to white settlers. Since Nebraska was located in the northern half of the…

    • 413 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    This bill (known as popular sovereignty) would allow the people of Kansas and Nebraska to decide whether they want to allow slavery in these areas. This bill won sectional votes and therefore, became a law in Kansas and Nebraska. This bill of popular sovereignty, cancelled the 1820 Missouri Compromise which had banned the expansion of slavery. This made the Northern States angry because they wanted to end slavery, however now, they feared that slavery would spread in the West. Furthermore, the confrontation from the North made the South slavery supporters angry because they believed that the Kansas Nebraska bill had been approved. The bill also created conflict between the citizens of Nebraska and Kansas. All the conflicting cities and states led to riots (Bleeding of Kansas). This unrest kept on raising between Kansas, Nebraska and North and…

    • 712 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    By electing me as president, the people chose for power to be exercised with principle. The Senator is right in one assertion, that I do wish to reunite the North and the South, but not at the sacrifice of social change. However, one must understand social change cannot be forced upon the South like it is some conquered foreign nation; such oppression was after all, the very reason they seceded in the first place and by humiliating them as Mr. Sumner so desires, will only birth another horrid…

    • 555 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    His 115 = Civil War

    • 1994 Words
    • 8 Pages

    * Also referred to as “Bleeding Kansas” and allowed territories to determine if they would allow slavery within their boundaries or not…

    • 1994 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Good Essays