Golden Andrew Mr. Gruskin AP U.S. History 2 March 2007 John Brown: Murderer or Martyr? It was 1859 and slowly burning away, was the fuse of the Civil War, which, with disunion and secession, could explode at any moment. Northern abolitionists fought to prevent southern secession in order to preserve the union, while the South threatened to secede in order to preserve slavery. The United States, on the brink of disunion over the slavery issue, could have held together or divided, crumbled, and been lost. During this time of trouble, abolitionists in the North dedicated their lives to eliminating slavery in the United States, once and for all. One such abolitionist, John Brown, schemed "to secretly invade the South with a handful of followers, call upon the slaves to rise, furnish them with arms, and establish a kind of black free state as a sanctuary" (Bailey and Kennedy 432). John Browns obsessive dedication to the abolitionist cause is one to be admired. Believing he received a mandate from Jesus himself to rid the world of the evil serpent of slavery, "Old Brown" of Osawatomie, Ohio was responsible for leading a number of violent attacks on southern proslaveryites. The tough, strong-willed, and thin figure moved to Kansas, from his home of Ohio after various accounts of horse theft and fraudulent business dealings (Bailey and Kennedy 423). Kansas, during this time period, was the center of a North-South feud of slavery. With the southern proslaveryites claiming the Kansas territory as slave state, and the northern abolitionists claiming
Kansas as free territory, much violence broke out and the territory accordingly received the title "Bleeding Kansas." On a hot summer day in May of 1856, Brown "led a band of his followers to Pottawatomie Creek," where "they literally hacked to pieces five surprised men, presumed to be proslaveryites" (Bailey and Kennedy 423). Unfortunately, but as expected, this incident sparked fierce retribution from the proslavery southerners and dishonored the free-soil movement as the South now believed that the North was fully comprised of deranged abolitionists like John Brown (Bailey and Kennedy 423). The Norths support of Brown and opposition to his sentence and hanging only strengthened this opinion of the North for the southerners. Ultimately, the accounts of John Brown and the resulting North-South feud over Kansas were of the many causes of the Civil War that would occur five years later in 1861. "Altogether, the Kansas conflict destroyed millions of dollars worth of property, paralyzed agriculture in certain areas, and cost scores of lives" (Bailey and Kennedy 423). The feuding, although paralyzing and violent, did not hinder Kansas application for statehood based on popular sovereignty. "Popular sovereignty left the decision regarding the ,,peculiar institution to the people of the territories as a matter of local autonomy, with direct democracy to be exercised by territorial themselves" residents (Dean 1). This idea of popular sovereignty was originally promoted in 1847 by presidential candidate, Lewis Cass, as a solution to the territorial crisis (Dean 1). "The doctrine later became closely associated with Senator Douglas in the 1850s as he helped incorporate it into the Compromise of 1850 and the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854" (Dean 1).
With the application for statehood, the proslaveryites of Kansas composed a fraudulent document called the Lecompton Constitution. "The people were not allowed to vote for or against the constitution as a whole, but for the constitution either ,,with slavery or ,,with no slavery" (Bailey and Kennedy 423). And even if the popular consensus was "with no slavery," "one of the remaining provisions of the constitution would protect the owners of slaves already in Kansas" (Bailey and Kennedy 423). This fraudulent document protected slave owners and kept black bondage legal no matter what the outcome of the votes were. Without much success, the infuriated free-soilers boycotted the polls, leaving the polls open to the proslaveryites who approved the constitution with slavery in 1857 (Bailey and Kennedy 423). In Washington, the issues of "Bleeding Kansas" aroused congress interest. President James Buchanan, under a strong amount of southern influence, completely supported the Lecompton Constitution, unaware that such support might cause division of his democratic party over the matter. However, Senator Douglas, who backed popular sovereignty, completely opposed this fraudulency (Bailey and Kennedy 424). "Deliberately tossing away his strong support in the South for presidency, he fought courageously for fair play and democratic principles. The outcome was a compromise that, in effect, submitted the entire Lecompton Constitution to a popular vote" (Bailey and Kennedy 424). As a result, free-soilers rushed to the polls and voted the Constitution null and void. Kansas would continue to remain a territory until 1861, when the southern secessionists left congress and the Civil War broke out. Consequently, John Brown, perceived as a murderer by some, and a martyr by others, obsessively dedicated his life to the abolitionist cause and, as a result of his
violent surges, was sentenced and hanged. This man, this fanatical, crazy man, is now recognized as a chief spark of the Civil War. His beliefs led to his violence, which led to retaliation, then led to feuding that caused deaths, property damage and money lost, and most of all, led to the division of the democratic party over the Lecompton Constitution, and the Civil War.
Works Cited Dean, Eric T. "Stephen A. Douglas and Popular Sovereignty." The Historian 57.4 (1995): 733+. Questia. 11 Mar. 2007 <http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=5001651628>. Bailey, Thomas and Kennedy, David M. "Kansas in Convulsion." The American Pageant. Houghton Mifflin Company. Boston, Mass. 1998.