Unit
Years: 1846-1857
Freedom & Equal Rights
Historical Events, Movements, and Figures
The Missouri Compromise was a significant piece of legislation passed by the United States Congress in 1820. It aimed to address the issue of the expansion of slavery into new territories acquired by the United States. The Missouri Compromise was a landmark legislative agreement aimed at preserving the delicate balance between free and slave states in the United States, but it ultimately failed to resolve the deeper divisions over the issue of slavery.
In 1857 when Dred Scott, an enslaved American, brought suit against his current enslaver, John F. A. Sanford, the country was embroiled in a heated debate over the influence of the institution of slavery on the country. Scott sued for his family’s freedom because he believed that his time living in free territories, protected by the Missouri Compromise, made his status as a slave illegal. Mr. Scott’s case rose to national prominence because it represented many of the concerns from both sides of the debate. The case raised questions about what constitutional rights African Americans had and whether the Missouri Compromise could limit the spread of slavery in the country.
The majority opinion, delivered by Chief Justice Taney, called into question many ideas associated with citizenship and the status of African Americans in the United States. Americans across the country reacted strongly to the decision and the implications of the case would have long-lasting impacts on American society.
Document 3.15.5: Excerpt from notes Abraham Lincoln wrote in 1858 in advance of his “house divided” speech
Why Kansas is neither the whole, nor the tithe of the real question.
“A house divided cannot stand.”
I believe this government can not endure permanently half slave, and half free.
I expressed this belief a year ago; and subsequent developments have but confirmed me.
I do not expect the Union to be dissolved. I do not expect the house to fall; but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing, or all the other. Either the opponents of slavery will arrest the further spread of it, and put it in the course of ultimate extinction; or its advocates will push it forward till it shall become alike lawful in all the states, old, as well as new. Do you doubt it? Study the Dred Scott decision, and then see, how little, even now, remains to be done.
From: “The Boisterous Sea of Liberty: A Documentary History of America from Discovery Through the Civil War” written and edited by David Brian Davis & Steven Mintz
Document 3.15.5: Excerpt from notes Abraham Lincoln wrote in 1858 in advance of his “house divided” speech
Why Kansas is neither the whole, nor the tithe of the real question.
“A house divided cannot stand.”
I believe this government can not endure permanently half slave, and half free.
I expressed this belief a year ago; and subsequent developments have but confirmed me.
I do not expect the Union to be dissolved. I do not expect the house to fall; but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing, or all the other. Either the opponents of slavery will arrest the further spread of it, and put it in the course of ultimate extinction; or its advocates will push it forward till it shall become alike lawful in all the states, old, as well as new. Do you doubt it? Study the Dred Scott decision, and then see, how little, even now, remains to be done.
From: “The Boisterous Sea of Liberty: A Documentary History of America from Discovery Through the Civil War” written and edited by David Brian Davis & Steven Mintz
A person or entity against whom a legal action or lawsuit is brought, typically in a civil or criminal proceeding.
A party initiating a legal action or lawsuit in a court of law, typically seeking redress, damages, or enforcement of rights or obligations against another party known as the defendant, and responsible for presenting evidence, arguments, and claims in support of their case, under the guidance of legal counsel or representation. Plaintiffs may include individuals, organizations, or entities alleging harm, injury, or violation of legal rights.
A written opinion or statement issued by a judge or justice who disagrees with the majority decision in a court case, often outlining alternative legal reasoning or arguments.
A member or supporter of the Free Soil Party, a political party in the United States during the mid-19th century that opposed the expansion of slavery into the western territories and advocated for free soil, free labor, and free men.
The power of a court to review and potentially invalidate laws, regulations, or government actions that are deemed unconstitutional or exceed the authority granted by the constitution, allowing courts to interpret and apply the law and serve as a check on the legislative and executive branches of government.
The legal authority or power of a court, government agency, or other entity to hear and decide cases, enforce laws, or exercise authority over a particular geographic area or subject matter, often defined by statute, constitution, or common law principles.
The collective opinion or viewpoint held by the majority of members or participants in a group, organization, or society, often influencing decision-making, policy formation, or public discourse, and representing the prevailing perspective or consensus among the majority of individuals.
The state or condition of being null or invalid, often referring to a legal or contractual status in which something lacks legal force, effect, or validity, and is considered to have no legal or binding significance, often resulting from a defect, flaw, or violation of law or regulation.
A gesture or act of respect, homage, or submission, often involving a bow, curtsy, or other deferential movement or expression, performed as a sign of reverence or acknowledgment of someone's authority, status, or superiority, and commonly practiced in various cultural, religious, and ceremonial contexts.