Perfectly Reasonable Foolishness
As eastern railroads built west, they were drawn toward commercial interests in Chicago and Mississippi River commerce centered in St. Louis. By provisions of the Missouri Compromise a central route to the Pacific favored formation of free-states, thereby putting an end to the balance of power in the Senate. With antislavery sentiment growing in the north, the south saw the central route as an existential threat to its economic way of life. Congress deadlocked. No agreement could be reached on a rail route to the Pacific.
In 1854 Senator Stephen A. Douglas, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Territories, introduced the Kansas-Nebraska Act, proposing creation of two western territories, along with repeal of the Missouri Compromise. This gave Missourians and their southern sympathizers the expectation of a return to the balance of power formula for territorial expansion- one state slave, another free. Northern interests had no such intent. A bitter Congressional floor fight ensued.
The deadlock was broken by adding a ‘Popular Sovereignty’ provision to the Kansas Nebraska Act, which allowed inhabitants of the territories to determine the slavery issue. This well intended bit of ‘Perfectly reasonable’ foolishness enabled the bill to pass with the support of southern interests. President Pierce signed it into law. Foolish you say, how could allowing the electorate to determine a local issue be foolish?
When the slavery issue reached the ballot in Kansas, Missourians poured into the state to elect a pro-slavery territorial government over the objection of Kansas residents. This prompted Kansans to elect their own antislavery government. The issue bitterly divided the new territory to the point of bloodshed. Kansas burned in a harbinger to the wider conflict to come.
The Pacific railroad remained a dusty stack of survey maps until 1861 when the boil that became the war of secession finally burst. Southern legislators resigned their seats in congress and returned to their homes. Opposition to a central route to the Pacific disappeared. Union Pacific and Central Pacific proposals for a transcontinental railroad were put forward and approved by Congress in 1862. The Herculean construction effort would not complete until 1869, just in time to bind the nation’s reconstruction in economic union never to be shaken again. American commerce, defense and settlement could now traverse the continent from Atlantic to Pacific in relative comfort and safety and do so in the breathtaking span of ten days.
Once in awhile, historical research takes an unexpected turn. The politics of selecting a route for the transcontinental railroad provide a fascinating insight to the events of the Kansas Missouri border war. For most of us it’s a connection popular history overlooks. There are lessons in that history.
Next Week:
The Lessons of History
https://www.amazon.com/author/paulcolt
Ride easy,
Paul
In 1854 Senator Stephen A. Douglas, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Territories, introduced the Kansas-Nebraska Act, proposing creation of two western territories, along with repeal of the Missouri Compromise. This gave Missourians and their southern sympathizers the expectation of a return to the balance of power formula for territorial expansion- one state slave, another free. Northern interests had no such intent. A bitter Congressional floor fight ensued.
The deadlock was broken by adding a ‘Popular Sovereignty’ provision to the Kansas Nebraska Act, which allowed inhabitants of the territories to determine the slavery issue. This well intended bit of ‘Perfectly reasonable’ foolishness enabled the bill to pass with the support of southern interests. President Pierce signed it into law. Foolish you say, how could allowing the electorate to determine a local issue be foolish?
When the slavery issue reached the ballot in Kansas, Missourians poured into the state to elect a pro-slavery territorial government over the objection of Kansas residents. This prompted Kansans to elect their own antislavery government. The issue bitterly divided the new territory to the point of bloodshed. Kansas burned in a harbinger to the wider conflict to come.
The Pacific railroad remained a dusty stack of survey maps until 1861 when the boil that became the war of secession finally burst. Southern legislators resigned their seats in congress and returned to their homes. Opposition to a central route to the Pacific disappeared. Union Pacific and Central Pacific proposals for a transcontinental railroad were put forward and approved by Congress in 1862. The Herculean construction effort would not complete until 1869, just in time to bind the nation’s reconstruction in economic union never to be shaken again. American commerce, defense and settlement could now traverse the continent from Atlantic to Pacific in relative comfort and safety and do so in the breathtaking span of ten days.
Once in awhile, historical research takes an unexpected turn. The politics of selecting a route for the transcontinental railroad provide a fascinating insight to the events of the Kansas Missouri border war. For most of us it’s a connection popular history overlooks. There are lessons in that history.
Next Week:
The Lessons of History
https://www.amazon.com/author/paulcolt
Ride easy,
Paul
No comments have been added yet.
