The Topeka Constitution

1124 Words5 Pages
Since the United States has existed, slavery has been secluded to the southern portion of the country. As time went on the northern states became increasingly progressive while southern states found more reasons to justify the treatment of African Americans. The free state party wanted whites and blacks to be free, would support the Topeka constitution since it is anti-slavery, and would support the United States of America in the Civil War. The border ruffians wanted African Americans to be enslaved by whites, would support the LeCompton constitution since it allowed slavery, and would support the Confederate States of America in the Civil War. The racial attitudes of the border ruffians and the free state party were due to many key differences…show more content…
The two different groups represent two opposing ideologies that were willing to go to extremes to achieve their goals. The Topeka constitution was created by the inhabitants of Kansas which did not allow slavery so the free state party would support this constitution (Hahn 11/10). Since Kansas was above the thirty-six and thirty parallel line many people from the north migrated there because it will become a free state any way until Kansas-Nebraska Act was passed which allowed popular sovereignty, that the Kansas and Nebraska territory can decide for themselves if the residents want to have slaves or not. Since the residents could vote on slavery many people from Missouri crossed the border into to vote illegally and these people were called the border ruffians (Hahn 11/10). When the border ruffians started voting illegally to decide on statehood which gave pro-slavery side a huge advantage and would support the LeCompton that allowed slavery, so people from nearby free states were getting upset to the point where John Brown a deeply religious absolutist from the north took upon himself and his followers to take action that would his group killing five people which started ‘Bleeding Kansas’ (Hahn 11/10). After this attack more armed conflicts rose between the two different groups that have different ideas and beliefs…show more content…
As each group represents one of two opposing sides in the Civil War free state party is the United States of America or the Union while the border ruffians is the Confederate States of America. The free state party wanted slaves to be free through justified means like religion from Great Awakening and Second Great Awakening were many preached that all humans are created equal and since everyone is on equal terms then no one should enslave another person (Hahn 10/11). Other then religion a lot of European countries already banned slavery within their empires. So to many Americans it would seem as barbaric if a majority of the developed world has gotten rid of something altogether while the land of the free still has something that even opposes what is written in the constitution “all men are created equal”. Like with the caning of Sumner where Preston Brooks used his cane to beat up Charles Sumner on the senate floor because Sumner was insulting the way of life of the south (Hahn 11/8). After this event happened both men with their matching side viewed them as defended the cause. On the other hand, the border ruffians truly believed that slavery is a good thing that even benefits the slaves. Patriarch society was dominated in south, where the head man of a plantation even viewed all of his slaves as being his children. With the Second Great Awakening which spread throughout the
Open Document