American History

The article, the Caning of Charles Sumner Slavery, Race and Ideology in the age of civil war, by Manisha Sinha discusses in details the various reactions to the caning of Charles Sumner by Preston Brooks. The caning took place on May 22, 1856 in the Senate Chamber and evoked widespread reactions from people on both sides of the slavery debate. Sinha starts her paper by mentioning the actual incident and Brooks boasting of his actions in a letter to his brother. This is followed by an account of the background which led Sumner to give his provocative speech which incited Brooks to take this unprecedented step. The paper goes on to discuss in details the various reactions to his actions and how they shaped the subsequent policies. As she mentions, the attack on Sumner, further widened the divide between the pro-slavery South and the anti-slavery North since after the attack, even those Northerners who did not advocate black rights felt that violent proslavery men like Brooks were threat to the norms of republican government. The paper even includes the viewpoint of African Americans to the caning. Sinha starts with first discussing the reactions from the people from South, who saw the Abolitionist agenda as a threat to their way of life. Here, Sinha discusses in details how many Southerners supported the caning and felt that the incident taught the pro-slave Abolitionists a lesson, while congratulating Brooks. To highlight the North South divide, she mentions how the South saw Sumners reaction to the caning as unmanly and cowardly while the North attacked Brooks for his cowardly actions in attacking a defenseless man. She then switches to the Norths viewpoint which saw the caning as a blow against representative government. She rounds up the paper by giving details of the consequences of the action for Sumner, Brooks and anti-slavery rhetoric in American politics.

The paper, All Southern Society Is Assailed by the Foulest Charges Charles Sumners The Crime against Kansas and the Escalation of Republican Anti-Slavery Rhetoric, by Michael Pierson, describes in details the circumstances which led Sumner to give the Crime Against Kansas speech. After a brief discussion of the existing literature which sees the incident as a reflection on the personalities of the two men, Pierson goes on to discuss the political background of Sumner. He first establishes the political credentials of Sumner, mentioning how he was elected to a full term in the US Senate despite his party being in minority. According to Pierson, Sumner felt strongly about his anti-slavery stance and was afraid that he would not be able to pursue his fight if he lost the elections. He was seeking for a credible platform to get re-elected and decided to escalate his anti-slavery rhetoric to this end.

Pierson than goes on to describe how the politics between 1851 and 1855 shaped Sumners actions, discussing in details all the behind the scene activities which led to the incident. He talks about the various anti-slavery speeches Sumner had given in the past and how he had often alluded to the illegitimate relationships between the slave owners and their slaves. By the end if 1955, Sumner was looking to further push up his anti-slavery rhetoric as he started feeling a rising urgency. According to Pierson, the Crime Against Kansas speech was prepared over several months with Sumner deliberately resorting to insults while keeping within the decorum of the Senate House. Pierson next goes on to carefully interpret the speech which, though insulting to Southerners, was carefully clothed in decent language, in keeping with rules of the House. The paper ends with a general reaction to the speech and Sumners denial that he had intended to provoke a physical assault with his speech.

The article,  After The First Northern Victory The Republican Party Comes to Congress, 1855-1856, by Joel Silbey, goes into the details of the rise of the Republican party in the congress. The paper discusses how a number pf people, from different parties, with only one common anti-Democratic Party agenda came together to form the Republican party. The Party did not officially come to power until 1860 and the period leading to this victory was full of internal fighting within the Republican ranks. Silbeys paper focuses on the period between 1855 and 1856 and goes into the details of the voting trends to show the serious divide among the republicans. It started with the appointment of Nathaniel Banks as the Speaker of the House of Representatives. Although his election as the speaker could be regarded as the first major republican victory, it did not come easy, and according to Sibley, Banks won only because his rivals were seriously fragmented and because of the downfall of the Whigs Party.

After giving the background, Silbey moves to the congressional dimensions of the Partys rise to power. He lists the voting trends of the Republicans on some of the crucial votes to highlight how severely the party was divided on most issues. His aim in this paper is to show that the formation of the Republican Party was not an easy one as in the initial years, the party was highly fragmented. The only thing common between the various people representing the Republican Party was their stance on issues which was largely different from those of the Democrats. The paper ends with mentioning that at the end of 1956, the Republican remained divided and just one of the many protest movements, which could not yet be called a Party.