When Kansas had been thus settled and developed, other states both new and old, were to be put through the same course. Writing of this plan thirty years later, Mr. Thayer said:

If evidence were required, beyond the report brought in by Mr Thayer, as already set out, to stamp the whole plan as absurd, this latter language of Mr. Thayer would answer that purpose. As an example of how one of the expectations of Mr. Thayer was realized, it is only necessary to say that instead of there being one hundred thousand people from Massachusetts in Kansas, as there would have been had his twenty thousand per annum materialized, there were in Kansas, in 1860, only twelve hundred and eighty-two people from Massachusetts.

The report of Mr. Thayer was published broadcast. It appeared in the New York Tribune, May 20, 1854. Mr. Greeley was enthusiastic in his approval of the plan, as his editorials at that time sufficiently testify. Other papers, both in the North and the South, contained Mr. Thayer's report, and comments thereon. Knowledge of the Emigrant Aid Company, and its intentions, was, in a short time, as extensive as that of the Kansas-Nebraska bill.

The effect of the formation of emigration companies and societies in the North, alarmed the South. - Slavery had just triumphed in the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska bill. The question as to whether Kansas should be a free or slave state, had by that bill, been referred to the people who might make the first constitution of the State. That form of dealing with the slave question was known as "Squatter Sovereignty." When it was known that certain Northern states intended to combat this form of that settlement, in Kansas Territory, and try to secure Kansas to freedom by sectional emigration, there was nothing left for the South to do but to meet the conditions with counter organizations, if the contest was to be continued. It came early to be the belief of the South, that the friends of a free state in Kansas did not intend to abide by the terms of the Kansas-Nebraska bill. The victory for slavery had been won in the halls of Congress, and the fact that it was not accepted as conclusive, was a surprise to the slavery leaders. They immediately assumed this position: Granted that the repeal of the Missouri Compromise was wrong, it was equally wrong to attempt to nullify the Repeal by violence, which the organization of sectional emigration societies was held to be. In the South, many of those who had opposed the Repeal, were, by the acts of the North, thrown into the ranks of the pro-slavery element. The passions of the South were aroused by the formation of these political, sectional emigration societies to the same point to which the Northern people had been stirred by the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska bill. No other event so angered the South as the formation of these societies. Every resource was to be drawn upon to effect a plan to offset the work of the societies.⁷

The feeling on the western border of Missouri can be adequately described only by calling it a frenzy against all anti-slavery people and movements. They supposed the twenty thousand persons from Massachusetts might arrive in Kansas at any time. They determined to go over into the Territory at once and stake out their claims preparatory to permanent settlement, whether the Indian titles had been extinguished or not. There had long been secret orders in the South for the regulation and control of slaves. Their functions had been principally to execute local police regulations and furnish patrols for plantations. These societies were now reorganized. They were changed in purpose and strengthened for new duties. Perhaps some new orders were instituted. They were given other names, and they held frequent meetings. The new names of some of these societies were: "The Blue Lodge," "The Social Band," "Friend's Society," and "The Sons of the South." There were many others, but these were the principal ones in existence in Missouri. They were the basis of the organization to counteract the societies in the interest of free state.⁸

During the month of May, much of the Indian land, in what is now Leavenworth County, had been staked out as squatter claims. There had been no survey of the lands of Kansas Territory and there were no legal descriptions of parcels of lands on which to lay these claims. They were taken under the pre-emption law, entitling a citizen of the United States to one hundred and sixty acres of land for a homestead, but the land had to be purchased from the United States after a home had been established upon it. There was at that time no homestead law as later known. The squatters staked out their claims as nearly in accordance with these conditions as possible. They marked their claims by putting up a rude cabin, or by bringing timber or logs for such a cabin, or, in some instances, by placing four logs upon the ground as a foundation for the future cabin. By the treaties negotiated with the Indian tribes, it was provided that much of the land should be sold by the Government to settlers. In many instances land of this character was settled upon by the squatters. On the 10th of June, 1854, the squatters held a meeting in the Salt Creek Valley, west of the City of Leavenworth. At that meeting a Squatter's Claim Association was formed and the following declarations and resolutions were adopted:

At Weston, in Platt County, a meeting adopted the following resolution:

At Liberty, the county seat of Clay County, there was held a large meeting. The following declaration and resolution were passed:

On the 28th of June, 1854, the correspondent of the Baltimore Sun, sent his paper an abstract of the above resolutions:

As showing the state of feeling of the citizens of the State of Missouri, the following extracts from public prints of that day are set out.

Democratic Platform, Liberty, Mo., June 8, 1854:

June 27, it said:

The Liberty Platform expressed itself in these words:

The Platte City Argus:

Later it said:

A meeting held at Westport passed the following resolutions:

⁹In the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, the South had secured what she termed Southern constitutional rights. She had triumphed. Her national victory was won. It is probable that she would have made an effort to dissolve the Union had she failed to secure the equal rights for slavery gained in the Repeal. But having obtained all she contended for, that crisis was passed.

What had the South done in the repeal of the Missouri Compromise?

She had voluntarily surrendered the national phase of slavery and accepted in lieu thereof the local phase of slavery - Squatter Sovereignty. The nation should notshould say whether slavery should exist in its bounds.

The extension of slavery, after the Repeal, was a local question - not a national question.

While the South had seemingly triumphed, she had in fact insured her own defeat. For the repeal of the Missouri Compromise would have destroyed slavery peaceably in another generation. The foundation for its destruction had been laid in the development of a national sentiment against it by the Repeal.

But for sectional emigration the South would have lost Kansas peaceably - and would have accepted that result without war - there would have been no solidified Southern sentiment to sustain an appeal to the sword. The Union sentiment in the South would have been able to assert itself. It would have pointed out that the South had lost through following her own plans. The slavery propagandists would thereafter have been a radical faction devoted to a losing cause, and would have disappeared, as have radical factions standing for the agitation of a settled issue in all ages.

Flaring maps in many histories show the vast extent of the Great Northwest thrown open to slavery by the Repeal. The South could not have gone there. Slave labor was profitable in the production of cotton. To have made it profitable in other industries would have required more time than the South could have given. For all that country was unsettled - a virgin wilderness. Slavery could not have seated itself in that country, even if unopposed, in one generation. The climatic theory of Webster would not have materialized. It has long been proven that the negro can live in comfort in any climate a white man can stand.

So, in summarization we find this:

The South demanded the Repeal of the Missouri Compromise as an act of justice.

She would have dissolved the Union if she had not secured the Repeal.

The Repeal was the end of the struggle as a national matter. The crisis was passed. The cause for secession no longer existed.

The extension of slavery was made a local issue. It became such when the South voluntarily accepted Squatter Sovereignty.

Slavery, instead of gaining by the Repeal, really destroyed itself by enacting that measure.

For it shocked and aroused the moral sense of the Union, which would have swept away slavery by peaceful means.

Slavery was revived as a national issue by the organization of sectional emigration to Kansas.

This organization was as great a crime as was the Repeal.

It changed the form of the extinction of slavery from a moral to a political contest - from a battle of moral principle to one of arms - force.

The Civil War did not result from the aggressions of slavery after the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, but

It was the result of the new issue raised in Kansas - sectional emigration - followed to its logical conclusion.

Once the issue came up for final settlement - once the issue came to be freedom or slavery, bondage or liberty - there was but one course. Then, it did not matter how the issue had been raised. Loyalty and patriotism, moral sense and justice, demanded that slavery be destroyed and liberty enthroned. And that made Kansas the battle-ground and her people immortal.

For Kansas won, and her victory saved the Union.

Thus, were sown the dragon-teeth which were sure to germinate and bear bountiful harvests of malice, intolerance, suspicion, strife, bloodshed, and civil war. In Kansas the South lost, and the history of the Territory and the State has been written by the victors - those founding a Free State through much tribulation. No dispassionate account of the actions of Northern emigration organizations has been written. But the time has come to set down the truth, even if it should prove that ardent friends of liberty and of free Kansas were carried beyond the bounds of right by their devotion to freedom. If the spirit of freedom was commercialized - sold for gain - the man base enough to do it should be singled out. For war and death followed his act, and innocent blood lay at his door. And if a historian has not the courage to record the facts, even though these facts are sometimes to the disparagement of those laboring on the side of right, then he should lay down the pen. For, man is, after all, but man laboring under the weaknesses common to mankind. There is no perfection. Zeal even for the right may carry the best beyond due bounds. When the passions are moved to the depths, human nature does not always see the signal marking good from evil. So, were set here in this primal land the final lines between Freedom and Slavery. Far flung were the battle-lines. Whether by right or by wrong - there they stood. Would that they had been set in good will - as they might have been. Henceforth the murky night would be lighted up by the red glare, and blood was to cry to heaven for vengeance in the earth.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
VOLUME 1 & 2
BIOGRAPHIES — VOLUMES 3, 4, & 5
A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | Y | Z

---

Background and KSGenWeb logo were designed and are copyrighted by Tom & Carolyn Ward for the limited use of the KSGenWeb Project. Permission is granted for use only on an official KSGenWeb page.

---

©1997-2014 by Tom & Carolyn Ward