Bell Work• In your notebooks, respond to the prompt:• How can differences among students affect the school?• What kinds of differences could lead to problems of unity within

a country?

A Divided Government and a Divided NationThe Compromise of 1850, The Kansas-Nebraska Act, Bleeding Kansas and Dred Scott V. Sanford

Slavery in the Territories

• Some law makers wanted slavery banned in the territories of New Mexico, Utah.• California would

enter the union as a free state.

Quick Write

• If California and the territories outlawed slavery, how would that have disrupted the balance of power in the Congress?

The Compromise of 1850• With many southern

states threatening succession, a compromise had to be reached.• The Compromise of 1850

had things that both Southerners and Northerners liked.

What Northerners Liked• The Compromise of 1850

admitted California into the country as a free state.• The compromise allowed

for popular sovereignty.• Popular Sovereignty –

The right of residents of a territory to vote for or against slavery.

What Southerners Liked

• The Compromise of 1850 called for a stricter fugitive slave law.• The South also like

the idea of popular sovereignty.

The Kansas-Nebraska Act (1854)

• This law allowed popular sovereignty on the question of slavery in the territories of Nebraska and Kansas.• It also repealed the

Missouri Compromise.• States north of the

Missouri Compromise line could decide to be slave states by voting.

Effects of Compromise of 1850 and the Kansas-Nebraska Act

•These laws allowed for 1. Slavery to be extended into the territories and 2. For popular sovereignty to decide the answer to the question of slavery.

Bell Work

•Write a complete sentence answering the following question:

What were the main effects of the Compromise of 1850 and The

Kansas Nebraska Act?

Bleeding Kansas• Kansas voted to allow

or outlaw slavery.• Many free-soilers

(farmers against slavery) were going to vote.• Pro-slavery people

came in from Missouri and illegally voted.• Violence ensued.

Dred Scott V. Sanford• Dred Scott was a slave in

Missouri.• His owner took him to

Illinois (a free state), and Wisconsin (a free territory).

• Scott sued his owner, claiming that being in a free state made him a free man.

• The Missouri court ruled against Scott, and the case was appealed to the Supreme Court.

Questions of the Supreme Court

• 2 questions of the court:• Was Scott a

citizen? If not he couldn’t sue in federal court.• Was Scott a free

man because he travelled to a free state?

The Court’s Ruling• Dred Scott lacked legal

standing because he was not a citizen.• Being in a free

territory did not make a slave free.• The 5th amendment

protects property and slaves were property.

Effects of the Ruling• This decision declared

the Missouri Compromise unconstitutional.• Northerners were very

upset.• Southerners were

ecstatic.• This ruling guaranteed

the extension of slavery.

Ticket Out

• In pairs, list 4 events and explain how they led to greater hostilities between the North and the South.