Elephants in the White House

The debate over slavery was considered an "'elephant in the room" in American politics during the 19th century. Our class got into groups and made timelines with events, such as Bleeding Kansas and the Dred Scott Decision, that proved this point.

The top of the timeline is made up of events that had a pro-slavery effect. The bottom of the timeline is made up of events with anti-slavery effects. As we can see, the timeline is very balanced; even some events had both effects. The Compromise of 1850, for example, had pro- and anti-slavery effects. California was recognized as a free state and slave trade was abolished (though ownership was still allowed), which contributed to anti-slavery. However, slaves needed to be turned in without a jury trial, inhabitants of states had to decide on slavery within their state, and while Texas gave up Santa Fe, it remained the largest slave state in the Union. These were pro-slavery effects. Bleeding Kansas was more balanced than an event with only one outcome, but still leaned more towards pro-antislavery because of John Brown's attack on pro-slavery men. Slavery was a huge point in the Lincoln-Douglas debates as well. Lincoln believed majority shouldn't deny minority of their rights, while Douglas won with his idea of popular sovereignty.

As we can see, while slavery was really a balanced issue in the 1800s, it caused violence and mixed responses. It especially invaded politics when it came to popular sovereignty and the Lincoln-Douglas debates. While no one wanted to admit that slavery was a large part of politics, it was hard to ignore.

Bibliography

Compromise of 1850 notes, Edline.

Bleeding Kansas notes, Edline.

Dred Scott Decision notes, Edline.

Lincoln-Douglas Debates notes, Edline.