Southern leaders loud and proud speeches about killing to spread slavery.

More important than any speech Lincoln ever made -- Southern leaders boasted of killing to spread slavery.  And they promised to spread slavery to all of the USA.   Like Jeff Davis own "Letter to People of the Free States" 

But no one was more loud, more proud, about killing to spread slavery than US Senator David Rice Atchison. 

Atchison told President Pierce that he was going to Kansas to make sure Kansas citizens were "perfectly free to decide their own domestic institutions".

But when Atchison got there, first thing he did was hire over 1000 men to invade Kansas and terrorize anyone who even spoke against slavery.  By killing and torture, he installed the "bogus legislature" and made it a crime to publish anything against slavery.  He tortured folks who would not sign a pledge supporting slavery, and he boasted about it.

Let me repeat this -- Atchison BOASTED about it. See his speech and other comments below.

Also Atchison sent his boss (Atchison worked officially for Jefferson Davis when he got to Kansas) reports on the progress of the killing sprees.   See a surviving report below -- Atchison burned most of the paperwork during the Civil War, when it was obvious the South was going to lose..



Atchison led three raids into Kansas, each more deadly than the last.  Eventually his men burned Lawrence Kansas to the ground -- because they allowed a newspaper to publish an anti-slavery newspaper.  Atchison made fun of the unarmed citizens of Lawrence who ran away.  But those citizens later came back and kicked Atchison's men's ass.  

Atchison quit laughing.  In fact, Atchison left Kansas and hid out in Texas during the Civil War.   He was great at pumping up the hate, and hiring killers. He always "disappeared" when there was actual fighting to do. 

By the war -- Atchison worked officially for Jefferson Davis. Davis paid Atchison, paid his men, and named Atchison "General of Law and Order in Kansas".

Atchison -- like Jefferson Davis himself -- boasted Kansas was just the start. They would spread slavery to the rest of the USA, and beyond.

Sound crazy?  It sounded sane to them, and they killed to bring it to pass, and started the Civil War in the process.

You now know about 10 times as much about Civil War History than most US high school teachers.  Congratulations. 


Atchison first got Kansas Act Passed in Washington.  He, Jeff Davis, and Stephen A Douglas personally took the Kansas Act to President Pierce for him to sign.

They assured the foolish President that the Kansas Act was all about letting the people in Kansas "decide for themselves"  about their "domestic institutions". (Euphemism for slavery).

Then Atchison left immediately for Kansas. There Atchison started killing, terrorizing, and later killing, to stop people from even speaking publicly against slavery.    

The day after Atchison's first raid into Kansas.

Survivors of Atchison's first raid at a  reunion
fifty years later. 


If you think Kansas citizens actually wanted slavery -- think again.  Already Kansas citizens had voted 90 and 95% against slavery. Atchison hurried to Kansas precisely because the citizens were almost able to get Kansas accepted as a free state.  Atchison repeatedly said he would see "Kansas burn in hell" before he let it become a free state.

And if not for a few brave men in Kansas, who fought back (John Brown one of them)  Atchison would have gotten the job done.  Atchison promised his men that "Yankees"  were cowards and would run from armed men.  Atchison was wrong.


It's about damn time people knew about Atchison, who he was, how he got Kansas Act passed, and what he did when he got to Kansas.

See below for what Atchison did when he got to Kansas. 

Forcing "Niggers"  Down Throat of People in Kansas -- with promises to  spread  their  "special"  kind of slavery to Cuba, South American, and the "white world"

What did Southern leaders say was "special"  about their slavery?    

1) It was perpetual

2) It was ordained by God to punish slaves for biblical sins.


Ken Burns should redo the first 15 minutes of his documentary on the Civil War....... he was played for a sucker by Shelby Foote, a Jeff Davis and Confederate apologist.

    See what Burns (Foote)  "forgot" to mention to Ken Burns.

Burns did a great job on  most of the documentary -- except Foote seemed to made sure Ken didn't have a clue what actually led up to the Civil War. Like War Ultimatums.  Like Southern leaders speeches boasted of killing to spread slavery.   

Like Jeff Davis official address to people of the North - promising to spread slavery into the North.  Yes -- he did. And these things are as basic as it gets, but are not in Burns documentary, and are essentially not taught in our schools.  See why, below. 

Above: Survivors of Atchison's first killing spree into Lawrence KS, later in life      Their crime?   They allowed  a newspaper to publish anti-slavery articles. 

Almost as important -- Southern leaders were killing and boasting of spreading slavery from 1856 on.  Before Lincoln even ran for Senate, before Dred Scott decision, before the "House Divided" speech, Southern leaders were killing and boasting of it, to spread slavery.

We show you one such Southern leader.




Southern leaders themselves went to war -- and bragged it was a war to spread slavery "for the entire South".   They even issued War Ultimatums, and made good on those War Ultimatums. 

Southern War Ultimatums, boasted of at the time,  have  essentially been ignored in US text books. 

Atchison hired his men.  He had so few volunteers in Kansas, he had to pay them, and get more, pay them too, from Texas.   We show you the newspaper ads in their own newspapers urging men to come to Kansas, and promising they would be well paid.





 The killings in Kansas were common knowledge then -- the telegraphs, the internet of its day, carried the news back to Chicago, New York, and Washington with unprecedented speed. 

 Slavery had always spread this way -- always by violence. Not just violence to slaves, of course, but violence to anyone who dared try to stop even the spread of slavery.


Many historians tell us that the telegraph played a crucial role in the Civil War, and it did.  Almost unreported is a much bigger (IMHO) role it played in informing the nation just how vile, violent, and greedy slave power was.  

Tortures and killings in Kansas might go unreported for months, years, or never spoken of outside the immediate area.   But with the telegraph -- people could know in days, or weeks, once the telegraph operators repeated the stories.

That made all the difference. 


 Astonishingly, there is not one high school history teacher that we ever met, that even knows Southern leaders were killing to spread slavery from 1856 on. Not a single text book in the US makes this clear -- remember that, not a single text book makes it clear that a US Senator, who passed Kansas Act, immediately went to Kansas, and there started terrorizing, later killing and torturing, boasting he did so to spread slavery.  

Therefore, they can not also know that a US Senator -- officially-- led the killers, was paid to lead them, and worked (again officially) for Jefferson Davis at the time, and sent Davis the reports.

Jefferson Davis was then Secretary of War.  Senator Atchison, with Stephen A Douglas, passed Kansas Act.  Atchison, Douglas, and Jefferson Davis personally (remember this -- personally)  took the Kansas Act Legislation to President Pierce, "explained" it to him, and Pierce signed it. 

Pierce thought he was signing something that allowed the citizens of Kansas to be "perfectly free" to decide their "domestic institutions" (Orwellian double speak for slavery)  themselves.

Uh - not to much, actually. 



According to Atchison's fellow Senators, Atchison then immediately left for Kansas. Remember  this -- it's a BFD -- Atchison then immediately left for Kansas, and there started his violence and terrorizing, later killing, to spread slavery.  

 Kansas Act was supposedly legislation that allowed the citizens of Kansas to be  "perfectly free" to decide their "domestic institutions"  themselves.  Oh fucking bullshit.  



At first, Atchison and his men invaded Kansas to terrorize anyone from even speaking against, or voting against slavery.  They brought in over 1000 men, the first group mostly from nearby Missouri (Atchison's state), and simply took over all voting places, and dared locals to do anything about it.

Eventually Kansas citizens would fight back, and vote against slavery by 95%, and become a free state.  Atchison brought too few men, almost all paid men, and after Kansas citizens got armed and fought back, most of those paid killers left.   The remaining violent pro slavery folks were too few, too few to kill enough Kansas citizens, and too few to vote slavery in.

When Kansas citizens rejected slavery -- Southern leaders rejected state's rights.  Kansas had no right to reject slavery -- according to Jefferson Davis himself -- because of Dred Scott decision.

Jefferson Davis -- then and later -- made it clear too.   Kansas could not resist slavery, even after 90% of the Kansas residents voted to reject slavery, Davis in his own writing said the resistance to the spread of slavery, into Kansas, was "intolerable".

How the **** do you miss that?   Aitchison and Davis were screaming this from the rooftops, at the time. 

Here is the speech by Atchison himself -- just one documentation of Atchison's actions, and here he is boasting of killing, and making the men (who he just met) promise to kill.

He did it "for the entire South".

You could read his speech 50 times and find something new and more amazing in it, each time.  LINK TO ATCHISON'S SPEECH

This was common knowledge at the time - Atchison had his own newspaper in Kansas, the Squatter Sovereign. 

Invasion of Kansas by US Senator

Beating a  Senator on the Senate floor, for talking about the Senator that invaded Kansas.

Why the hell is this not a BFD in our text books? 


It sure as hell was a BFD at the time.  Why do "history" teachers not even know it --  at least they don't know Sumner was talking about Atchison passing Kansas act, with Stephen A Douglas, then going to Kansas and started to terrorize and kill.

The typical BS about Kansas is "Oh there is plenty of blame to go around out there".  

Senator Sumner was beaten on the Senate floor -- almost to death-- after a two day speech where he exposed Atchison, by name, and listed hundreds of details of the killings, tortures, and violence committed by Atchison and his men.

Atchison was in Kansas -- as Sumner was being beaten. Atchison gave his own speech (see it here) where he boasts of killing and torturing to spread slavery.

They both gave their speech the same week.  Yet I have never, ever seen any "historian" or history teacher have any clue about this. Atchison is in Kansas boasting about killing and terrorizing, and Sumner is giving a speech about Atchison killing and terrorizing, and as far as I know, no history text book has ever saw fit to connect these dots.

No time in US history --that we know of -- has anything remotely like this happened. 

That makes it baffling to me that "historians" are not all over this.  Lincoln got back into politics because of this guy -- literally. When Douglas and Atchison got Kansas Act passed, from that day forward, Lincoln was on the move, largely warning the country that now slave power had created, by Kansas Act and Dred Scott, an "irrepressible force"  that would push slavery into all of the US.

We will be all one thing -- or another.

And that started when David Atchison made Douglas help him push Kansas Act.   Atchison even bragged about that part of it!   

Unlike other Southern leaders, Atchison would boast about things others would habitually used euphemisms for. 


May 18 & 19 -- Sumners speech on Senate floor, Washintong

May 21 -  Atchison's speech outside Lawrence Kansas.

One Senator is boasting about killing and invading to spread slavery.   Another Senator is exposing that in his speech on the Senate floor.  In the same week. 

Sumner's speech was two days long.  It took that long for him to read into the record all the killings, tortures, and terrorizing done in Kansas.   And the killings were going to get much worse.  Sumner was just talking about what Atchison had already done.

Remember that. 

And by the way -- the killing exposed by Sumner in that speech was about to get worse -- a lot worse.  

The Senator giving the speech is beaten-- almost to death - right after his speech.

By the way -- John Brown's son, Frederick Brown (named after Frederick Douglass) was killed by Atchison's supporters just three weeks earlier, in August of 1856. 

Brown is now almost universally shown as some kind of crazy violent man.  The same people that tell you that, "forget" to mention Atchison supporters killed Brown's son, tortured and killed others, and now apparently were gathering the army Atchison had, to kill his entire family, as Atchison's supporters promised they would do.

So not only can you not understand Lincoln, without knowing what the hell Atchison did, you can not understand John Brown either. Or the Civil War.  Atchison and his men not only killed and tortured, they bragged about it and promised endless killing to spread slavery.

 Remember this -- Atchison was there to SPREAD slavery, and spread it by force, against states rights.  He said so repeatedly in a number of ways. 

 Ninety percent of Kansas citizens were against slavery.   Virtually no citizen of Kansas was so "pro slavery"  they would kill to spread it,.

Atchison's men - his paid men -- were almost all from outside of Kansas.   Your "history teacher" will know know that, they will not even know what Atchison was doing, or that he had to hire men to come to Kansas to do these violent things. 

The promises of violence, the War Ultimatums, the Address to People of the North, came from David Rice Atchison and Jefferson Davis.   No one else.  These two men were the prime movers. Both were US Senators or above --Davis was "Secretary of War"  for the USA.

Davis, Atchison and Stephen A Douglas literally took the Kansas Act that the latter two got passed in Congress, to the President to sign.

They had the foolish old president conned.  They convinced the president that they wrote the Kansas Act so that the people of Kansas would be "perfectly free" to decide their "institutions"  themselves.

Obviously, as Lincoln and many others said, the Kansas Act was precisely the opposite,  it was "a ruse, a fraud"  of profound importance.  

When describing Kansas Act, many  "historians" like Foner, McPherson, and others inexplicably quote Jeff Davis  and Stephen A Douglas hustle- - that Kansas Act was a way to allow citizens of Kansas to decide themselves. 

Douglas is, absurdly, called the "popular sovereignty"  advocate.  

The point is, with perhaps 800 more men under his command, paid for as Atchison said by Jefferson Davis, with his authority coming directly from Jefferson Davis and Stephen A Douglas (Douglas was Chairman of House and Senate Committee on Kansas)  Atchison was set to cause a lot more trouble -- trouble hat led directly to the US Civil War. 



Yet this episode of US history -- which led directly to the US Civil War -- is absurdly referred to in Orwellian terms as "The Trouble in Kansas". 

Southern War Ultimatums -- of 1856 by Atchison, and later again by Jefferson Davis and Southern newspapers in 1861.   Why not mention that?

Atchison issued War Ultimatums at the time -- in 1856.  See those in his speech.  Davis and Southern leaders would issue similar war ultimatums in 1861.  

Do our "historians" think War Ultimatums are trivial details?  It is astonishing to me, and has been since I learned about this, how "historians" like Foner, McPherson, Catton and others simply do not mention this, or mention it in such a casual way (never explaining what the Ultimatums were about clearly),  and refer to it in a page in back of the book, that virtually no one grasps today that the South, their leaders, very much issued War Ultimatums, and then very much made good on their promises of violence.



While your history teacher will insist they know all about the "Crimes Against Kansas Speech"  by Charles Sumner -- ask him/her who Sumner was talking about.

He was talking about Davis Rice Atchison and his men, and their killings, tortures, and violence immediately following Atchison getting Kansas Act passed in the Senate, then leaving immediately for Kansas.

 From his speech to his paid killers, 1856. 



Worked officially for Jefferson Davis.

He had the support of Stephen A Douglas.

He passed Kansas Act.

He immediately went to Kansas in 1854


If you think the US Civil War started in 1861,  after Lincoln was elected, you are mistaken.   And it's not your fault.  Stupidly our text book and most "historians" act as if the Civil War started because Lincoln was elected.  Utter nonsense --Lincoln getting elected meant really one thing:  the North could finally fight back.


Even more important than when Southern leaders started killing and boasting of it as their proud efforts to spread slavery is this -- Southern leaders did a complete flip flop on "States Rights"  when Kansas rejected slavery.

Actually Southern leaders never gave a shit about state's rights, but at times, they did use the term "states rights"  and "popular sovereignty"   to excuse their violence. 

 If you know the history of the spread of slavery you would know slavery always-- always -- spread by violence, and was maintained by violence.  This was no exception.   Contrary to what some folks may assume, there never was a real vote on slavery in the United States that approved of slavery.

The only way slave power could possibly create the illusion of the public being pro slavery is by killing, torture and force.   The "bogus legislature"  in Kansas was as good example as any.


"Perfectly free"

Before Atchison invaded Kansas with his paid killers, he first got Kansas Act passed in Washington, with his partner Stephen A Douglas.   Those the legislation was deeply hated -- almost everyone who voted for it in the North  lost in the next election-- Atchison and DOuglas were able to pass it by claiming this Act let Kansas citizens "perfectly free" to decide their "domestic institutions"  without any interference whatsoever.

Hilarious -- if killing and torture is funny.   As soon as Atchison passed Kansas act (apparently that night)  Atchison rushes to Kansas and gathers his hired men for a violent invasion.   If Atchison had more men and more time, he would have got the job done.




Kansas voted 90 and 95%  against slavery -- let me repeat that -- Kansas citizens voted 90 and 95% against slavery.   Horribly, and stupidly,  some "history" teachers claim the South cared about states rights.  Ironically,  about slavery, Jefferson Davis and the top Southern leaders were very much against states rights.  

 Southern leaders claimed Kansas people nor legislature, nor the US Congress, had a right to reject slavery because Dred Scott decision ordered the federal government to protect slavery. 

The killings to spread slavery, officially led by a United States Senator,  started in 1856.  And he boasted of it.  Jefferson Davis, then and later, made it very clear Kansas citizens had no right to reject slavery because of Dred Scott decision. 

In fact, Atchison's actions (passing the Kansas Act then rushing to Kansas and starting the killings out there) is why Lincoln got back in politics.

Ironically, Jefferson Davis, after the war, wrote his justification for sending killers to Kansas based on the Dred Scott decision.  But Davis and Atchison were sending killers -- and killing to spread slavery -- long before Dred Scott decision.   

Jefferson Davis did not disavow the killings or Atchison -- in fact, Davis officially named Atchison as "General of Law and Order in Kansas Territories"  and paid for Atchison's thousand or more men, mostly from Texas.  

Everything Atchison did, according to Jefferson Davis, was "Constitutionally required".  

The thousand killers sent to Kansas almost worked. 


At the time, Southern leaders made it very clear, in their own newspapers, in their own speeches, in their own war ultimatums, they were killing to spread slavery.

Our flag is red in color -- the color of blood. Our purpose is to spread slavery, killing all abolitionist -- until slavery is spread to all the West, regardless of Kansas rejection of slavery, and regardless that California was already a free state.

Boasting in their own newspapers they were killing to spread slavery  -- even though Kansas  voted against slavery and later became a free state.

It's not like no one knew about this -- or that this was some trivial detail.  Lincoln got back in politics because of what Atchison did -- did you know that?  Lincoln wrote about Atchison's men and their actions in Kansas in his personal letters. 


Did you ever hear of the stunning two day speech by Senator Charles Sumner?

You probably heard of it. It's called "The Crimes Against Kansas" Speech. and is one of the most famous in history.  Sumner was beaten almost to death at the end of the speech.  

Let me repeat that -- Sumner was beaten almost to death, on the Senate floor, for that speech. That speech was about David Rice Atchison - and his men -- killing and torturing in Kansas.  So yes, Atchison was well known. 

Atchison boasted of it. He did not deny it.

Charles Sumner being beaten on Senate floor September 1856.
He spoke for two days - and he spoke by name about Atchison and his paid killers. 

But before Sumner was beaten almost to death -- guess, go ahead, guess, who walked up to Sumner and told him he should be kicked like a dog? 

Go on, guess.  This guy Stephen A Douglas, Atchison's defender and partner. Business partner, and partner to pass the Kansas Act.

Douglas is shown in the drawing, at the time, laughing nearby. Laughing as Sumner was beaten.   

If you don't understand this about Douglas, you can't make much sense of the Lincoln Douglas debates, either. Douglas was all but pleading for someone, anyone, to kick Lincoln like a dog, too.

Douglas did not just "mention" that Lincoln wants your daughters to "sleep with Niggers".   Douglas ran from side to side of the stage in Charleston Illinois screaming it, with as much volume and drama as that amazing speaker could summon.  In all his "Nigger ranting"  as Quincy papers said, Douglas was never so loud and clear about anything in his life.  Lincoln was obsessed with "nigger equality"  and wants your daughters to sleep with those "Niggers".

Sumner -- the one beaten almost to death -- actually tried to scold Douglas for his use of the term "Nigger".  Douglas used the term with the most volume and venom. Douglas was a slave owner -- something most folks don't know.

Drawing at the time of Lawrence Kansas after Atchison's 
first violent raid into that town.

Their "crime"?  They allowed an anti slavery newspaper to publish their paper. Atchison and his men had declared it illegal to publish anti slavery material. 

See Atchison's speech yourself, below. He boasts he will kill, and he boasts the people of Lawrence will learn not to publish such things in the future.



Every single history teacher in the US should know this, it's very basic. Atchison being the US Senator who passed the Kansas Act should be taught in fifth or six grade.  His tortures and killing should be taught -the South was proud of it. His speeches and comments should be required reading.

In fact, Atchison's speeches were more important than Lincoln's at the time. Lincoln got back into politics full time BECAUSE of what Atchison did - pass Kansas Act in 1854.

 The beating of this US Senator Sumner  is recounted in almost every US history text book.  But do you know that the texts books stupidly fail to mention?

Sumner was talking -- by name -- specifically about another Senator, the Senator I am telling you about, David Rice Atchison. 

Everything Sumner speaks of is related to Atchison and his men. Sumner names Douglas, too, as the man who helped Atchison pass the Kansas Act.

Sumner himself, just minutes before he was beaten, actually spoke about Atchison leaving Washington "like a thief"  and going to Kansas to being the killing and torture.

For two separate days, Sumner read off the "crimes" by Atchison and his men.   Hour after hour Sumner read.   And hour after hour, Stephen A Douglas -- Atchison's partner, sat near by.   Did Douglas know Sumner was about to be beaten?

No one knows for sure if Douglas knew, but apparently he knew quite well, and was gleeful about it.  Sumner had been Douglas's political and personal foe for years,  and had admonished Douglas for his vitrolic use of the word "Nigger"  in the Senate.  Even Southern leaders avoided that term, in the way Douglas used it. Douglas in Illinois repeatedly accused Lincoln of "being obsessed with equality for the Nigger".  and "Lincoln wants your daughters to sleep with Niggers".

Why are we not told that?  It was common knowledge at the time. Quincy papers referred to this as Douglas's "Nigger rant"  implying it was common for him when speaking about Lincoln and equality. 



Why wouldn't everyone know that?   Why is that not taught?  Good question  - we tell you the answer below. 

Your "history" teacher will insist he or she are well acquainted with this speech. We have yet to meet one history teacher who has a clue of the obvious -- he was speaking about David Rice Atchison!

You can see Atchison's  speech to his paid killers (he hired them after advertising in Texas and South Carolina papers) HERE.

This was by no means Atchison's only loud and proud boasting of killing to spread slavery. And remember this -- he was the US Senator who got Kansas Act passed.

It's a damn shame we don't teach what Southern leaders at the time bragged out the ass about  -- and even more of a shame that we do not teach what they did. 

Atchison bragged -- see below-- they were already killing, and already at war, officially, in 1856.  Not kind of. Not in a way. they were at war, and they were proud of it.

You may say Atchison and a thousand men -- even if paid by Jeff Davis, and even if they boasted they were killing to spread slavery -- was not a war.

They called it a war, not me.  And it sure felt like  a war to the people killed. And they were proud of it. 

Only after the war did many Southern leaders try to pass off their efforts as "states rights".   And the time, Davis Atchison and others were killing to STOP states rights, once Kansas rejected slavery. 

True, Kansas was not a STATE officially when Atchison went there with over 1000 men and started killing and terrorizing.  

Here, Atchison boasts the Southern flag is red
for blood they would spill  to spread slavery 

Atchison was not a "lone ranger" on his own. He was officially Jeff Davis's "General of Law and Order in Kansas".

Davis would justify everything Atchison did as "Constitutionally required."  Resisting the spread of slavery into Kansas, Davis boasted of in his own book, was "the intolerable grievance"

Yet even after Kansas became a free state,  Jefferson Davis and all Southern leaders insisted Kansas must be  a slave state.   Their logic?   Exactly as Lincoln said their "logic" was -- by virtue of the Dred Scott decision, Kansas had no right to stop the spread of slavery.

By the time Southern War Ultimatums  hit Richmond papers -- and the newspaper was boasting of the ultimatums -- Kansas was already a free state, by votes of over 90%.

That should be, but is not, common knowledge today. 

Just like it should be, but is not, common knowledge that Southern leaders boasted and officially explained that Dred Scott meant even that STATE could not reject slavery.

When LIncoln spoke of the "machinery"  of the South to spread slavery -- he correctly and exactly exposed the Dred Scott and Kansas Act "logic"  the South used to force slavery by violence where it could not otherwise go.  Why on earth this is not taught as the most basic aspect, in clear terms, about the Civil War is a mystery to me.  Southern leaders boasted of, and boasted they were killing on that basis, and boasted they would continue to kill on that basis. 

Even more, they made it very clear, with War Ultimatums, and their own actions, why they were killing. 

 They were killing to spread slavery -- spread it against state's rights.  Kansas, California, Oregon had no right to reject slavery.  Kansas voted against slavery repeatedly, yet Jefferson Davis himself promised to spread slavery to the rest of the US. (Yes, he did, see below).

This is from Jefferson Davis own book after the war, explaining his "Dred Scott logic"  as justification for the war. Blacks can not be "part of the people"  under the Constitution.  They could only be property. And no legislature, no vote, no Congress could claim otherwise. 

California was already a free state -- that did not matter.  Even Oregon, a free state already, it did not matter.  The perverse Orwellian "logic" of Dred Scott ruled blacks are not  human beings -- and the government must protect that property. No state, no territory, no group, no Congress, no legislature could grant the black race the status of "persons".  

As Jefferson Davis himself made clear -- Dred Scott ruled that blacks CAN not be considered as persons, but only as property.  

According to Southern leaders -- at the time -- boasting proudly about it -- they started the Civil War in 1856.  And they (not me, not someone else) called it war to SPREAD slavery.  

Not just keep slavery, they made it very very clear, in words and in deeds, they were killing to spread slavery into Kansas and beyond, even after (remember that, after) Kansas folks rejected slavery by 90 and 95% vote.

Jefferson Davis himself made it clear, in his "Address to People of the Free States"  that he would spread slavery by force into the North.  See below. 

The point is -- Southern leaders themselves, loudly, proudly, and repeatedly called it a war, and insisted it was a war to SPREAD slavery.   Later they tried to claim they only cared about "states rights".

By their words, their actions, their killings, they actually hated state's rights when Kansas rejected slavery overwhelmingly.   

1) Atchison called it as war "for the entire South" to spread slavery.

2) Atchison worked officially for Jefferson Davis 

3) Jefferson Davis paid Atchison and his men, said that  "Everything Atchison did was constitutionally required."

4) Atchison is the Senator who passed the Kansas Act, with Stephen A Douglas. 

5) Jefferson Davis issued his own War Ultimatums in his own address, promising to invade the North and establish slavery there.


Common knowledge
at the time....

 Survivors of Atchison's first killing spree into Lawrence gather 40 years later for a reunion.

Lincoln wrote about the killings by Atchison's men in his letter to speed, and mentions Stringfellow, the most violent of Atchison's killers.   

Stringfellow wrote  "We will continue to hang, tar, feather and drown all abolitionists."    If not for John Brown finally fighting back,  Stringfellow and Atchison would have killed enough to get Kansas in the US as a slave state, despite 95% of white citizens of Kansas being against slavery.


One of the biggest mistakes in teaching US Civil War, is that we teach it as starting in 1861.  

 Southern leaders, officially and boastfully,  started killing (and called it a war to spread slavery) 1856 on.  They called it a war to spread slavery, they were doing the killing and boasting about it.  Maybe they knew?

There simply were not enough people in Kansas that would kill to spread slavery --and Atchison could not  hire enough men to force it through over a long period of time. 

Douglas and David Rice Atchison told the Senate that Kansas Act was all about "the citizens right to decide"  their own institutions.




 Charles Sumner would give his amazing speech about Atchison and his paid killers.  Atchison gave his own speech, in Kansas, boasting of doing the things Sumner detailed in his speech about Atchison, called "Crimes Against Kansas". 

Atchison was the US Senator forcing slavery into Kansas.
He then went there - officially --as Jeff Davis employee.

Davis named Atchison "General of Law and Order In Kansas".

Lincoln repeatedly exposed Douglas fraud in the Kansas Act.

It was quite the opposite of "popular sovereignty"  because Douglas's partner rushed to Kansas and started terrorizing and killing to make sure Kansas citizens could not reject slavery.  Clearly this was the plan all along. And it almost worked.

Lincoln said "Judge Douglas from his much vaunted doctrine of self-government for the territories; but this is only additional proof of what was very plain from the beginning, that that doctrine was a mere deceitful pretense for the benefit of slavery.


From the beginning -- from before Atchison even left for Kansas after passing the Kansas Act -- people knew what was going on.  Douglas's duplicity was well known.   

Despite Douglas repeated promises that no one would ever be "cruel enough"  to undo the Missouri Compromise,  that is exactly what he did not long after making that statement -- Douglas and Atchison passed the Kansas Act under the false pretext of "wanting Kansas citizens to be perfectly free to decide the institutions themselves".



Even Orwell would have a hard time outdoing Atchison and Douglas in their fraud of calling Kansas Act an effort to give "perfect freedom" of choosing their own "domestic institutions".

First - the "domestic institution"  was slavery.  Perfect freedom to choose slavery?

More -- 90% of the people in Kansas did not want slavery and rejected it repeatedly by votes and by arms when Atchison attacked them.  

Eventually Kansas did become a free state -- just before Lincoln took office.  But Southern leaders sent thousands of killers to Kansas, and made it a crime to preach or publish newspapers against slavery.   The leader was Jefferson Davis -- the man he sent to be in charge of the killings was US Senator David Rice Atchison.

And remember this -- because your "history teacher" sure does not know. Atchison was the US Senator who got Kansas Act passed in the first place, then immediately went to Kansas and started killing and terrorizing to prevent people from even speaking against slavery.

Sound like "perfect liberty" to you?

Sound like "state's rights" to you?



It is stunningly stupid to teach, as we do now in history classes in the US, that Kansas Act was an effort to allow "popular sovereignty" into Kansas.   Nothing could be further from the truth, and this was well known at the time,.  Why on earth teach now the lies of those who were actively killing to spread slavery then?

Lincoln exposed this over, and over, and over, at great length, hundreds of times.  Almost every time he opened his mouth this is what he spoke of -- the fraud, the violence the goal of Kansas Act and the other tool, Dred Scott decision.    We have stupidly let the slogans of the liars and hustlers of the time pass as honest efforts by honorable men.

Not honorable. Not honest. 



There was no outcry in Kansas for slavery. Quite the reverse.  There was no public saying "we must get rid of the Missouri Compromise"  which allowed slavery below Kansas and Nebraska, but forbid slavery above that geographic line.

 As Douglas admitted repeatedly, no one should worry about Kansas become a slave state, "19 out of 20 people there"  are anti slavery Douglas said.

So why would Douglas try so hard to push Kansas Act -- after he himself was part of the Compromise of 1850, and after he himself no one would ever be so vile as to undo that Compromise?

Answer:  because Atchison forced him to do so.  Atchison would take Douglas's Chairmanship of House and Senate Committee on Kansas (from which Douglas got tremendous power to hand out patronage jobs to his supporters).   Douglas would do anything -- including starting a Civil War -- to keep his power. 


Douglas insisted, Kansas was not a cotton growing place  - so do not worry. The climate was wrong for slavery he said, idiotically.   Lincoln pointed out repeatedly that the climate was much the same in Kansas as Missouri,  and pointed out that the only reason to pass Kansas Act, no matter how much it was sold as popular soverighty, was to force slavery into Kansas.

Lincoln was exactly right -- and so where the many Northerners who knew exactly what Douglas was doing.

Kansas Act was absurdly unpopular -- the public hated it. In fact, Douglas could not get off his train from Baltimore to Chicago, because crowds gathered to hang him in effigy.  Douglas himself told this story repeatedly.

More, over 80% of those who voted for Kansas Act were then kicked out of office in the next election.  

But Kansas Act passed, despite the massive unpopularity, because Douglas had so much power with his patronage jobs, that he forced enough  House and Senate members vote for it.

It did not help that many of those who voted for the Kansas Act were immediately kicked out by voters in the next election.  The Act passed, and Atchison was immediately in Kansas terrorizing  as described elsewhere.

It's a damn travesty that Atchison's speeches, killing sprees in Kansas,  and reports to Jefferson Davis are not in every US textbook. Both men personally boasted they were -- or would -- spread slavery into the rest of the United States.  

When you read Lincoln's speeches, you may see him repeatedly speak about the efforts to spread slavery to the rest of the United States.  


Lincoln was focused on Kansas because of what he said repeately  --if slave owners can force slavery into Kansas, against the will of 95% of the public, on the basis of Kansas Act and Dred Scott decision, then slavery will spread everywhere, by the same foul logic of Dred Scott.

That is the essense of the House Divided Speech.   Many history teachers present the House Divided Speech as Lincoln's regret that the county was so divided.

If you know the history -- and read Lincoln's speech closely -- you see he was exposing the fraud and violence of the Kansas Act and Dred Scott decision.

Of course Lincoln did not limit himself to that one speech.  Virtually ever word uttered out of Lincoln's mouth from 1854 until 1861, was about this.  It was about the role of Kansas Act and Dred Scott into pushing slavery to the rest of the United States,  not just into Kansas, but into the rest of the United States. 

  Incredibly, "historians" today either do not take that seriously or outright dismiss this spread of slavery into the rest of the US,  though the evidence for Lincoln's statements are overwhelming.

Lincoln was not only correct -- Southern leaders boasted of it, and acted upon those boasts.   The most amazing examples, but by not means the only examples, are Atchison's speech to his paid killers and Jefferson Davis own "Address to the People of Free States" 






Remember, Atchison is the US Senator who got Kansas Act passed.

If you don't know how stunning the Kansas Act was, and how it was passed, don't blame me.   Blame your history book and teacher.

Kansas Act, according to Southern leaders themselves, was done to spread slavery into Kansas.   Yet on the surface, and taught as such stupidly to this day, Kansas Act was supposedly an honest effort to "sort out"  or "deal with"  the "problem of slavery"  in the West.

Stephen A Douglas was the official sponsor of Kansas Act -- not long after he berated anyone "foul enough" to try ever to upset the Compromise of 1850 (which kept slavery out of the West),  Douglas himself was hell bent for leather to do exactly what he had recently claimed would be a vile action by fools.

So what happened to Stephen Douglas?  What made him suddenly, virtually overnight,  go ass over head to pass something that obliterated the "Compromise"  he so vehemently defended before?

This is what happened - David Rice Atchison.  As Lincoln knew, and said then, as hundreds of people knew, and said then, as Atchison himself knew, and said then, Atchison pushed Douglas to lead the fight to push slavery into Kansas on the pretext of "allowing the people to be perfectly free" to decide "their own institutions" (slavery) themselves.




People who knew Douglas knew immediately what he was up to, in this stunning "change".   Lincoln knew, and repeatedly, in polite but clear terms, exposed Kansas Act for the fraud it was.   In every debate, he exposed it.  In his many versions of House Divided,  he exposed it.  Stunningly "historians" seem to think Lincoln overstated the case, or do not deal with Lincoln's comments on that, at all.

Atchison wanted the Kansas Act -- no one ever thought of doing this, until Atchison made Douglas push it. Atchison himself took credit for pushing Douglas on it -- on the threat (not an idle threat either) that Douglas push this through, or Atchison himself would take Douglas's much sought after position as Chairman of House and Senate Committee on Kansas.  

Douglas was not only the most powerful speaker of his time, he also had the most patronage jobs -- in Illinois, and the country -- because of his Chairmanship.  Lincoln explained this very well, by the way, in his letters to Speed. 



"The most foul fraud ever committed" is the type of thing Kansas Act was called, by Lincoln and many others. 

We know Lincoln was right, that Kansas Act was exactly the opposite of what  it was sold as -- because Atchison made it clear, in bragging terms, and made it clear, by his actions.

Atchison first stayed in the Senate long enough to help Douglas push Kansas Act through.  

Then Atchison  immediately went to Kansas and there started terrorizing, later killing.

The US Senator who passed the Kansas Act -- he called it a war.  

He called it a war to spread slavery.

He was proud of it.

He worked for Jefferson Davis -- reported to Davis.

Davis paid Atchison and his men.

It almost worked.


Atchison  worked for -- officially -- Jefferson Davis.  He and his killers were paid -- officially - by Jefferson Davis.

He reported to Jefferson Davis.

Your history teacher will claim six ways to Sunday that he "knows all about "  Sumner's famous speech that he was beaten almost to death for.

But virtually no history teacher seems to grasp the obvious -- he was talking about David Rice Atchison, who as Senator, passed Kansas Act, then rushed out to Kansas, and there started killing and terrorising.

How the **** there is this basic, and monumentally stupid, disconnect is beyond me.  Sumner even said Atchison's name.  Stephen Douglas, Atchison's partner, sat by smiling as Sumner was beaten.

And Atchison gave his own speech, boasting of killing to spread slavery.

Idiotically the only time most "history teachers"  even mention David Rice Atchison is in the bit of trivia that (arguably) he might have been President of the United States for one day  in 1849. 


As you will see, Atchison should be known for  his brutal murders and tortures in Kansas, and his paid killers in Kansas  after he and Stephen A Douglas passed the "Kansas Act".
  Kansas Act, as Lincoln said, was an "exquisite fraud"  - that was in fact part of the violence to spread slavery to the rest of the United States.




Astonishingly absent in our US text books is any clear mention, much less emphasis, upon Southern leaders boasting they were at war to spread slavery.

Including Jefferson Davis own official "Address to the People of Free States"  shown below.



 Southern leaders including Jefferson Davis himself boasted of it, at the time. In their own war ultimatums, speeches, and documents.

Lincoln  said repeatedly the South had instituted a violent fraud that would either destroy the United States, or destroy slavery.

Because of Atchison's actions, (he is the guy who passed Kansas Act) and Dred Scott, slavery would go all over the US, or the United States would end.

And as Lincoln predicted -- the United States would not end.  In other words, slavery would end.



Stephen A Douglas was the lead Senator pushing the unpopular (widely unpopular, as you will see) Kansas Act. But it was Atchison, his business partner, who made him push Kansas Act through. 

Eighty percent of those legislators that voted with Douglas, lost the next election.   Douglas (as Lincoln showed in his letter to Joshua Speed) used threats of patronage punishment to anyone who did not vote for Kansas Act.

 The bottom line is, David Rice Atchison was the guy who pressured Douglas to push the Kansas Act through.

More important that that -- Atchison immediately went to Kansas, after its passage, to terrorize the citizens of Kansas, and forbid them the legal right to publish newspapers against slavery.



Equally amazing is the goofy narrative we have allowed in this country to claim Southern leaders gave a shit about popular sovereignty or "state's rights".   

It's true they said that -- but when Kansas citizens rejected slavery and tried to be a free state, Atchison went into action, pushing through the Kansas Act, then literally going, immediately, to Kansas to start his reign of terror.



1) Citizens didn't want slavery

2) John Brown

Kansas citizens were against slavery by 95%,  and everyone knew it.  

When pushing the fraudulent Kansas Act through Congress, Stephen A Douglas said essentially, you have nothing to worry about, 19 out of 20 people in Kansas would reject slavery, we just want them to have the right to vote on it.

So don't worry, slavery won't go into Kansas because the people there will be "perfectly free" to reject it.


And Kansas voters did vote -- rejecting slavery overwhelmingly, and by 90 and 95%.

No one on earth at the time -- even the people doing the killing in Kansas -- claimed that citizens of Kansas wanted slavery. 


As events proved, 95% of Kansas citizens were against slavery. 

Even Stephen A Douglas, repeatedly and emphatically admitted Kansas citizens were against slavery.   He claimed there was no concern for Kansas becoming a slave state,  they only passed the Kansas Act to make it official, people had a "right to vote on their institutions".

And Kansas citizens would be "perfectly free" to chose their institutions without any interference whatsoever.



Atchison had to use paid men. 

   It was clear before Atchison ever invaded Kansas with 2,400 men (amounts vary, depending on who you listen to) that the whole thing was a fraud, and that Kansas citizens did not want slavery.

  In fact, the entire reason Atchison had to hire men and invade Kansas was just that -- the white male citizens of Kansas rejected slavery, and everyone knew it.  They rejected slavery by vote before Atchison got there, and after.

They became a free state later, just before Lincoln took office, because of an overwhelming vote against slavery.

But between 1854, and 1861, Kansas citizens were killed, tortured and terrorized, by men sent by Jefferson Davis, led by David Rice Atchison.

Atchison Speech, text version. Click Here.

 Atchison boasted about it. He did not admit it, he boasted of it. See his speech. And his actions at the time, reported in the press, coincide exactly with his speech.  Only later, after the South lost, did Atchison and many others, so eager to kill to spread slavery before the war, change to excuses like "we just wanted states rights" .

But they hated state's rights -- especially Kansas right -- to reject slavery.  

 From Jefferson Davis's own book, written after the Civil War. He was still incensed that Kansas could reject slavery by vote. He justified everything Atchison did in Kansas as "Constitutionally required".


If an honest election was held --and the people voted-- said none other than Stephen A Douglas (who helped Atchison in his killing sprees, see below)  no one supposed Kansas would be a slave state.   By 19 out of 20, he said in one speech, and 9 out of 10 in another speech,  he supposed Kansas whites would reject slavery.

Yet even after -  after-- Kansas rejected slavery and became a free state, by 95% vote, that no longer mattered, said Jefferson Davis.  And he said so in writing. See his own book "Rise and Fall". 

 Davis sent over 800 killers to Kansas (an eye witness claimed 2,500).  The regular US army, under control of Jeff Davis as Secretary of War, never did seem able or willing to prevent the paid killers from doing whatever they wanted.

See the testimony taken at the time, including by the "Howard Committee"  who sent Congressmen to Kansas to take sworn testimony about the killings.

Atchison himself promised to bring 5000 men to Kansas, and simply "kill every abolitionist there" (Anyone against slavery was called an abolitionist).

  The Dred Scott decision ruled blacks were not persons (really, not human beings) but must be viewed as property.  As property, no legislature, no popular vote, nothing could constitutionally keep slavery out. 

Writing in his own book, Davis made it very clear for all  to see -- Dred Scott decision changed everything, now blacks were not human beings, not persons!  (Do not be confused by the euphemism used so often - that they were not citizens -- specifically, they were not human beings, not persons, but must be seen as property, a fact Davis and Lincoln spoke of often, Davis gleeful about it, Lincoln distraught) 



 Dred Scott decision not only made the Declaration of Independence invalid (yes, it did)  but the people themselves, nor their legislature, nor any legislature, could keep slavery out.  

In other words, states rights  was fine, for everything BUT

 Lilncoln, and many others, had Kansas Act pegged correctly from the first hint of it.

Lincoln said "Judge Douglas from his much vaunted doctrine of self-government for the territories; but this is only additional proof of what was very plain from the beginning, that that doctrine was a mere deceitful pretense for the benefit of slavery.

Those who could not see that much in the Nebraska act itself, which forced Governors, and Secretaries, and Judges on the people of the territories, without their choice or consent, could not be made to see, though one should rise from the dead to testify ... thus showing the thing to have been altogther the most exquisit farce ever enacted...

A ruse, a fraud, a violent assault on the citizens of Kansas to force slavery down their throats, regardless of how overwhelming the vote and sentiment was against slavery. And it almost worked. 

That is why it was obvious that Kansas Act was never done for "popular sovereignty" but to fool people to think it was, push slavery in as quickly as possible, before Kansas filled up with even more anti-slavery folks from the East.  

Not just any US Senator -- Atchison was the Senator that pushed Stephen A Douglas (his partner) to pass Kansas Act.  

Atchison left Washington as soon as they passed Kansas Act, went to Kansas, hired hundreds of men from Missouri, invaded Kansas, and prevented anyone from voting against slavery.

Atchison and Stephen A Douglas were business partners.  Together, they pushed Kansas Act through.

Atchison immediately went to KS and started terrorizing folks.  Douglas stayed in DC, and as Chairman of House and Senate Committee on Kansas Territory,  helped cover for Atchison, and insisted to anyone who asked that Atchison was "the most kind man I ever met".    

As Lincoln said repeatedly -- it was clear that Kansas act was planned to do force slavery into Kansas against the will of the people, even though Douglas said 100 times it was about "popular sovereignty"  it was actually the opposite.

Lincoln was correct


In fact, Jefferson Davis officially named Atchison as "General of Law and Order" in Kansas.  Atchison quickly passed laws making it illegal to speak or write publicly against slavery (such laws were already in place, in the South). 


People did.  

And people made other people bleed and die.  

Historians and textbooks should get that right, first. Understand and make clear who killed who, and why, in Kansas.  Then add any BS you want.   History of this era really boils down to "who killed who, and why".

You may remember "Bleeding Kansas" in college or high school, or even "Trouble in Kansas"?   

Euphemism much?   Sadly the layers of BS in many text book is so thick, they ignore who killed who, and why.  As you will see, Southern leaders sent 800 paid killers to Kansas,  and the man leading them boasted there were there to spread slavery -- and silence all opposition to slavery.

The man who lead the killers was none other than US Senator David Rich Atchison, who had personally pushed Kansas Act through Congress, with the eager help of his business partner, Stephen A Douglas.

In fact, Atchison left the Senate immediately after passing Kansas Act, and just weeks later was in Kansas, leading the first invasion of Kansas. 


Importantly, Atchison and Douglas had repeatedly promised that the Kansas Act was "to allow the citizens of Kansas to be perfectly free to decide their domestic institutions (slavery) for themselves."

Orwellian.  Freedom to chose, but in reality, the very US Senator who passed Kansas Act personally was in Kansas terrorizing, and later killing, to force slavery down their throats. 

Stupidly, most "history teachers" will tell you "oh there was plenty  of blame to go around in Kansas".    Nonsense, it took a while for the dirt farmers in Kansas to even fight back.  When Atchison came in the first time, with 600-800 armed hired thugs from Texas, the farmers in Kansas just ran away.   Atchison laughed about it, and predicted that's how easy this would be.   The "abolitionist" he said, are cowards.

He did not figure on a guy named John Brown. Atchison's men killed John Brown's son, Frederick (named after Brown's close friend, Frederick Douglass).    They also promised to kill the rest of Brown's family, and brown himself.

 Big mistake.  Brown would fight back the next day. Sadly, when you hear about John Brown, you only hear the part where he and his group of men killed five people. Not a word about them killing his son, not  a word about their promises to kill him and the rest of the family, and not a word about these men being associated with David Rice Atchison men.

So  call that "TROUBLE IN KANSAS"? 

See why leaving out the facts makes a difference?

 Trouble is when you lose your car keys or have a flat tire.   Today, the word trouble does not convey what it did then.


This group of survivors (survivors of Atchison's first raid into Lawrence)  actually held a reunion fifty years later.

Survivors of one of Atchison's killing sprees, 

gathered for a reunion almost 50 years later.

Atchison and his men were killing, torturing,  hanging, drowning anyone who resisted them.   By "enacting" their own bogus legislature (called bogus legislature to this day) Atchison  made it a crime to publish anything against slavery, and forced men to sign "pro slavery" oaths or be tortured.

And it almost worked.  Shame on "historians" who blame "both sides"  and ignore the basic facts -- Atchison and hired killers invaded Kansas.  And Atchison was the US Senator that got Kansas Act passed -- then went to Kansas and started terrorizing, later killing.



The Price We Pay for Bullshit. 

Foner is a great example.

Philosophy professor Harry Frankfurt nailed it.

Bullshit is uquiquitous, and human nature.  But regarding history, it can prevent academics from bothering with facts, and instead, push what makes them sound smart.

Yes, who knew?  People want to sound smart!  But as human and natural as that is, history is too important to be overwhelmed with bullshit. Do all the BS you want, in other words, but first, get the facts right.  

Seriously -- sounding smart is what teachers want, that's human nature, not evil.  But it can be such a strong need (to sound smart) they push a narrative which could be totally or partly bullshit, they don't much care.

This should be in every US text book. Instead, it's not even mentioned in US text books, much less made clear.  Southern leaders boasted they were killing to spread slavery from 1856 on.




 -- Senators Atchison and Stephen A Douglas pushed Kansas Act through Congress, claiming this would give Kansas the right to vote slavery in or out, "without any interference whatsoever


 -- David Rice Atchison, the Senator who helped pass Kansas Act, immediately went to Kansas and started killing and terrorize, to spread slavery and to stop people from speaking against slavery.


 --US Senator Charles Sumner (the Senator beaten almost to death on the Senate floor)  was talking about David Rice Atchison passing the Kansas Act, then rushing to Kansas to kill and terrorize in Kansas.

This is the speech Sumner was beaten for -- it was a speech entirely about what Atchison and his men did in Kansas, since leaving after he  passed the Kansas Act.

This is the beating. 

Charles Sumner being beat on Senate floor -- after speech about ATCHISON.

You can just read the Sumner speech -- he specifically talked about Atchison and his men, their killings and tortures in Kansas. 

Sumner was beaten nearly to death -- for his speech about Atchison.  

Later Southern crybabies claimed Sumner was beaten for insulting someone's wife. Nonsense, read the speech. He was talking for hours- - two days in fact -- in exceeding detail about Atchison and his men's killings and tortures.

Atchison's partner (in Congress and in business) was Stephen A Douglas, who told Sumner he deserved to be beaten like a dog --  and sat there smiling as Atchison was beaten.

Douglas supported Atchison's actions in Kansas for three years, until after LeCompton Constitution fraud, when the outcry against Douglas (for supporting Atchison) was so extreme, he could not get off the railroad car from Baltimore to Chicago.

Douglas only then decided to throw Atchison under the bus, but until then, supported Atchison 100%. 

Southern leaders got the area in white by fraud and violence,  but promised in the "Compromise" of 1850 they would be satisfied with what they already stole from the US and from Mexico (see below).

But it 1854, they decided they wanted more -- much much more. They wanted slavery against states rights -- all the way to the Pacific.

David Atchison was the US Senator who, with Stephen A Douglas, got the Kansas Act passed.

He immediately went to Kansas and started killing and terrorizing citizens in Kansas, and boasted of killing to spread slavery there -- against states rights.

Why would Atchison have to kill and terrorize to spread slavery? Because 95% of white citizens there had already voted to reject slavery.  Atchison could not allow the "popular will" to prevail in Kansas, never mind that Kansas Act was supposedly passed so the people of Kansas could be "perfectly free to decide their own domestic institutions".

Not for states rights.

Think the Civil War started in 1861?  

Think Southern leaders were for state's rights?  Well, that's not what Southern leaders  said at the time.   

In 1854, Southern leaders "wanted both halves" of the loaf of bread, Lincoln said. 

South had already stolen or violently pushed slavery to be by far the biggest geographic part of the USA --  but then they wanted MORE.   Part of the violence was the Mexican War, which Lincoln confronted President Polk about in 1846,  calling him out about the fraudulent war that everyone knew was to double the size of slavery.  And, it did.

But the South was not satisfied even then, even after they cemented their theft of Mexican land, and pushed through the "compromise" of 1850 (As Lincoln said, "What compromise), it was not long before the South was killing again, and demanding spread of slavery again.

They wanted all the way to the Pacific.  The US Senator who pushed Kansas Act through Congress, led the killers in Kansas.

And there isn't five US history teachers who could tell you that.  But it's the most basic fact of US history in the 1850s.  Nothing else comes close.  Not the Lincoln Douglas debates. Not John Brown's raid. Nothing.

Southern leaders killing to spread slavery -- and the US Senator who passed Kansas Act leading the killers -- is without a doubt the most stupidly overlooked fact in US history.

It takes a willful ignorance to be this stupid about US history, for those who profess to teach history, and do not even suspect this basic fact.


And Jefferson Davis specifically claimed he would get slavery into the NORTH,  in his 1863 address.

Did your history text book ever mention Southern War Ultimatums?    

No -- but they should have.  Southern leaders boasted of their war ultimatums, in 1856, and in 1861.

The Ultimatums were simple -- we can spread slavery anywhere we want,  including into Kansas, against states rights.


First, you have to understand Kansas rejected slavery by votes of 90 an 95%.   Most people don't have  a clue Kansas citizens ever rejected slavery.

After - remember that - after Kansas rejected slavery, Southern leaders sent killers to Kansas under the leadership of a US Senator named David Rice Atchison, who Jeff Davis (then Secretary of War) named officially as "General of Law and Order in Kansas."

There, in Kansas, Atchison boasted of killing to spread slavery, sent reports back to Davis (see below) about the progress of the killings, and promised the problem would soon be over.

He was wrong.

The point is, Southern leaders were already at war, already calling it war, already killing and torturing, and boasting they were killing and torturing, from 1856 on.

1861 was just the first time the US federal government was able to fight back.   Not sorta, not kinda, not in a way. 


You never heard of it?  Don't blame me.  I would have told you. In fact, I'm writing about book about this guy, and how he worked officially for Jefferson Davis.  

Not my fault you never knew.

What they "forgot"  to mention, was the basics -- who did what.

So we better tell you.  

When KS rejected slavery in 1853, Southern leaders sent a US Senator to Kansas.   This Senator stayed in Washington just long enough to pass the "Kansas Act"  -- then rushed to Missouri, hired 400 to 500 men, armed them, and rode into Kansas to terrorize, later kill, anyone who resisted the spread of slavery there.

It's important you know WHO  did WHAT.   Real history is this -- who killed who, and why.  Everything else is bullshit.  Get who killed who right, first, then add the bullshit.  What goes on in US text books?  Just the opposite. We get a bunch of bullshit, and seldom, if ever, even get to "Who killed who, and why"


 If you think the US Civil War started in 1856 - it's only because no one told you:  Southern leaders boasted they were killing, and calling it a war "for the entire south"  in 1856.

But much more importantly -- no one told you Southern leaders HATED states rights,   the moment Kansas rejected slavery. 

The "big flip flop"  on states rights came when Kansas Citizens tried to become a free state.   Jeff Davis and US Senator David Rice Atchison tried violently to stop citizens of Kansas from voting--- or speaking -- against slavery.

That's right  -- speaking against slavery,  publishing newspapers against slavery--  suddenly became against the law.  Officially against the law.   

Who passed laws against speaking against slavery?  

This guy -- US Senator (from Missouri) Davis Rice Atchison.  The same guy who passed Kansas Act in 1854, went to Kansas immediately, to terrorize, later kill, to spread slavery.

The first thing Atchison did in Kansas, was violent. He invaded Kansas with 600 men, and created his own "bogus legislature"  that made it a crime to publish anything against slavery.

He also required white men sign a pledge to be FOR slavery. 

No one told you this, did they?

Well they should have. Not my fault you did not know.



Davis and Atchison first passed the famous "Kansas Act" with the help of Illinois Senator Stephen A Douglas.  

Douglas and Atchison -- both in the Senate - promised the Kansas Act would make people "perfectly free"  to decide their own "domestic institutions"  without any interference.   Lincoln and others knew immediately -- in fact, before KS act passed  --  that this was another of the many ruses and violences (Lincoln called it violence, and as you will see, he knew what the fuck he was talking about).

If there was any doubt in anyone's mind that Kansas Act was a violent ruse, that was gone in a flash, when Atchison actually physically left the Senate immediately upon passing the bill -- and rushed to Kansas.  His first act was to break into a Missouri armory and take the arms for 600 men, and invade Kansas. 

He did not go to Kansas first. He first went to the armory, got the weapons.   Clearly he had this planned, and as clearly, because no one tried to stop his men from taking the weapons, Jeff Davis as Secretary of War  already sent word ahead, not to interfere with Atchison.

In fact, after they stole the weapons, Atchison and his men RETURED THE WEAPONS to the armory.



Kansas citizens already took a vote -- and 90% of them were against slavery.  So Atchison and Davis did not want to waste time.  They had to act before the Kansas Citizens got their act together (as they eventually did ) to be come a free state.

The Kansas Act came about because Kansas citizens were actually voting --in real elections -- and rejecting slavery. 

So no, Southern leaders did not respect states rights. In fact, they sent killers to stop it. Remember that. 

True-- Kansas was still a territory the first time Atchison invaded it.  But citizens of Kansas were trying to become a state -- and eventually did become a free state.   But they only became a free state because they eventually fought back against David Rice Atchison, and his paid killers, and became a free state under President Buchanan.



The dumbest mistake in US history 

There is a lot of nonsense in our "history" text books.  To be fair, no country ever tells the ugly truth about itself. Southern crybabies have for over 100 years controlled the text book publishing business -- and Southern school boards have never allowed anything candid about South's role in killing, and torturing, and terrorizing, to stop states rights.  

Instead, over and over we are told some bullshit about Southern leaders "deep concern" for states rights.  Nonsense, utter nonsense. Not sorta nonsense, not kinda nonsense, not "in a way" did Southern leaders care about states rights.

Yet so often is that bullshit repeated, it's become accepted as valid.  The actions -- the killings, the tortures, the hangings, the drownings -- done by Southern leaders and their paid men, should be clearly exposed in every US text book, North and South.

But as amazing as the actual killing, tortures, and hangings (etc) were -- more amazing if possible --  Southern leaders boasted of it, at the time.

As you will see.


The important thing here is -- Southern leaders BOASTED they hated states rights, as you will see. They sent killers there, they killed, they tortured, and they almost won.

They were not just boasting of killing "for the entire South"  They were atcually doing it. Not sorta, not kinda, not in a way. 

Local artist's drawing the day after the first invasion of Lawrence Kansas, by Atchison and his paid men, 1856


 Ever hear of US Senator David Rice Atchison?

Probably not -- but you should have.  Atchison is the man who got Abraham Lincoln back into politics, 1854.  He not only got Kansas Act passed, he immediately went to Kansas, and started killing and terrorizing there.

Additionally, Atchison sent reports to Jeff Davis, about the progress of the killing sprees.

Atchison boasted he was at war "for the entire South"  

Our flag -- boasted Senator Atchison is red in color "for the blood"  they will spill to spread slavery. 


 It was NOT just this speech -- it was not just  his writings,  his reports on the progress of the killing sprees.

It was his actions. First, passing Kansas Act, which he claimed would leave people "perfectly free" to decide their "domestic institution" .

But after he passed Kansas Act, Atchison left the Senate immediately, when to Missouri, hired men, broke open a weapon's armory, and invaded Kansas.



Behind Sumner, in this drawing, is Stephen A Douglas, laughing. Douglas and Atchison were partners.  Together they passed Kansas Act.Atchison boasted he pressured Douglas to do so.

Charles Sumner -  a Senator who knew Atchison well -- gave the famous "Crimes against Kansas" speech two years later. He was beaten almost to death, for it.  On the Senate floor.

Sumner spoke for two days -- all about Atchison, and his men, killing and terrorizing in Kansas.

Do you know what happened to Sumner at the end of his speech, on the Senate floor?

 Sitting near by, smiling, was Stephen A Douglas, Atchison's friend-- they together passed the Kansas Act.

Jefferson Davis officially made Atchison the "General of  Law and Order"  in Kansas . 

Yet go to almost any "hstory" book, even by the popular  "major historians" of our time  (McPherson, Foner, Catton)

They may mention Atchison -- but they never explain he was killing, and boasting of killing, to spread slavery. They never make it clear, THIS is the US Senator who passed the Kansas Act.

And they never make it clear, he officially worked for Jefferson Davis -- his men, and he, were paid at the time by Jefferson Davis, with the approval of Stephen A Douglas.

Soa US Senator -- who passed the Kansas Act -- goes to Kansas and starts killing and terrorizing to spread slavery.

He boasts about it.

He sends reports to Jeff Davis.

Jeff Davis officially supports him-- and his killing sprees, which Davis claimed were "Constitutionally required" 

History text books can find room in their books to tell you the name of Lee's pet chicken.

They can find room in their books to tell you what Confederate belt buckles looked like in 1864.

But they can't fucking find room too tell you a US Senator passed Kansas Act,went to Kansas, and started killing and terrorzing people who even SPOKE against slaver

They can't fine room to tell you this Senator - Atchison - created a legislature that immediately  passed a law that making it a crime to publish anti slavery newspapers in Kansas?

They can't fine room for his speech, where he boasts he is killing to spread slavery, and boast he rides under the Southern flag -- red in color for the blood they would spill to spread slavery?


They can't find a god damn place for one fucking sentence that because they passed this law -- Atchison would invade, torture and kill, and claim he was the "legitimate" authority" in Kansas, and dared anyone to ever publish an anti slavery newspaper again.

IN 1890's

They can't find the space to tell you Lincoln got back into politics in 1854 SOLELY because of what Davis Rice Atchison did - pass the Kansas Act? 

 No more basic fact than that. Lincoln gets back into politics because of what Atchison, and his partner Stephen A Douglas did. Then Atchison immediately goes to Kansas and there starts killing and terrorizing.

Seriously -- what the fuck is wrong with these dumb ass "historians" ? I wanna know.


 Atchison's men were always paid help, as  you will see.  That was their eventual undoing.  He had no local killers, to speak of.  To get the killers, he had to pay them, and even with Jefferson Davis paying Atchison and the first bunch of men, eventually Davis by 1858.

We even have copies of ads he took out in Southern newspapers, boasting he needed killers, because "the time to talk was over".

The year?



his writings,  his friends' boasting, and his own record of violence and boasting of violence, his own reports to Jefferson Davis. 
And no, he was not some "nut" acting on his own.  He was officially a US Senator, he is the Senator that got the Kansas Act passed, that caused Lincoln to get back into politics in 1854.

As Lincoln said repeatedly, hundreds of times -- and so did most other people who knew what was going on - Kansas Act, passed by Atchison was a "violent ruse"  to push slavery into Kansas and the entire West.

The amazing thing -- Atchison BOASTED of things that proved Lincoln right.  Atchison BOASTED of passing Kansas Act and boasted of rushing to Kansas and there, starting terrorizing, later killing to spread slavery.  

How on earth we now teach Kansas Act as some kind of effort to "resolve the question of slavery in the territories"  is a tribute to bullshit dumb asses today, not knowing what the hell Southern leaders (not just Atchison) were bragging about and doing at the time.  If you think it was Atchison acting on his own -- oh hell no.  He was paid, and he boasted about being paid, by the "present administration".

Jefferson Davis and Stephen A Douglas were his superiors -- Davis the "Secretary of War"  and Stephen A Douglas as Chairman of House and Senate Committee on Kansas.


Together these three men -- Davis, Atchison, and Douglas, not only got Kansas Act passed on the Orwellian pretext of "allowing the people of Kansas to be perfectly free to decide their local institutions without any interference" -- Atchison literally went to Kansas immediately, hired over 800 men, and invaded Kansas, there stopped people from voting against slavery, and set up his own "bogus legislature" as it's now uniformly called.

The "bogus legislature"  immediately passed laws that made it a crime to publish anti slavery newspapers (which was a common law in the South) and made it illegal to tell a slave they were in a free territory, which they were.

When you see Atchison's speech below -- remember this. He is bragging, bragging, he will kill to spread slavery, and that the men will be "amply paid" by the "present administration".  

Remember this too - his speech is very much representive of what Atchison did in Kansas, his own boastings there, his own reports to Davis. 

Jeff Davis justified, as you will see, anything Atchison did as "Constitutionally required".   Davis "logic" of justifying the violence?   As you will see -- Dred Scott.  Davis cited, in his own speeches then, and his own book, the Dred Scott decision as the legal basis for all that happened in Kansas.

One tiny problem- - Atchison was already killing and terrorizing in 1855 and 1856.  The Dred Scott decision did not come out till 1857.  Essentially, Southern politicians got Dred Scott decision to say the words it did (see below) to justify the killings and violence they had already started.

By Davis logic -- and his own words -- Kansas citizens  had no right to reject slavery, even after they became a free state, because of Dred Scott decision.

He wrote about that -- we show you -- in his own book "The Rise and Fall of the Confederate States". 

People often put up this quote by Davis, to make it seem Davis objected to those who stop "majority rules".  

Quit the opposite. Davis was justifying slavery into Kansas, even after Kansas rejected slavery and became a free state.   Majority does NOT rule, he said, in the case of slavery, because Dred Scott ordered (and they did order) that slaves been seen NOT as human beings (not as persons) but as property.

And as property, Davis explained, no state, no public vote, no legislature, could stop anyone from bringing their "property" into Kansas or anyplace else.

That is why Lincoln blasted the living fuck out of Dred Scott decision, and correctly exposed it, and Kansas Act, as the "machinery"  that the South used, which by its very design, would lead to slavery all over the USA, or the end of the Union.

Because of Dred Scott, the extreme orders to see blacks as not human beings (not persons) but property, there was no earthly way to stop the spread of slavery, unless by Constitutional Amendment, or by the SCOTUS to rehear, and reject, that vile order to make blacks not be human beings.

Blacks are "inferior beings"  and a subordinate class.  Davis called them "of a different caste"   and that God "delivered the black man to us, perfectly fit for servitude".

If you don't believe me, this is from his own book, Rise and Fall. he fudges the year of Dred Scott, it did not come out until 1857.   Davis did not want the reader to know that.  This book was written years later.  The KANSAS act was 1854. 

He also tried to soften "not persons" by saying here "not part of the people".  But the Dred Scott decision itself, said NOT PERSONS.  Davis, writing this book in  

Lincoln spoke of this "violent ruse" over and over.  His life was devoted to exposing it, after 1854.

How the fuck "historians" have glossed over it, claiming in stunning stupidity that Kansas was some kind of effort to settle an issue, shows just how much BS is repeated and then believed. 

You can easily see if any "historian" knows what the hell they are talking about, by  checking out how they treat Kansas Act and Dred Scott.  Hell, it's extremely rare for them to even mention that Lincoln was exposing it daily for YEARS, as a violent ruse, that would lead to the end of the Union, or an end of slavery.

In other words, Kansas Act and Dred Scott made it a fight to the finish.  And it did, because by that "logic"  no state, no territory, could keep slavery out. And Lincoln said that over and over.

Was he wrong? HELL NO.



Go see most explainations -- repeat of bullshit -- about Dred Scott. go to 30 or 50 Youtube videos where "experts" discuss it. Same shit. "Citizenship"  issue. Denied "citizenship".

Yes, blacks could not be citizens because of it, true.  But more they could not be HUMAN BEINGS,  And no law was valid -- remember that - no law was valid that treated blacks as humans.

As Stephen Douglas actively boasted in the Lincoln Douglas debates - the Supreme Court specifically refuted blacks as persons and said because they are NOT persons,  they can not be treated as such by the government and no legislature, no public vote, held against such a ruling.

Sound like state's rights to you?   It was quit the opposite of state's rights.

  And Lincoln said this over and over.

Davis explained this in his own book, in his very clever prose. Clever, because he "forgot" to mention that Kansas overwhelmingly rejected slavery and was already a free state by the time of Southern War Ultimatums listed in Southern newspapers in 1861. 

You can read his book and just assume people in Kansas WANTED slavery. Fuck no, they fought a five year war, leading up to US Civil War of 1861 to 1865.   No one in their right mind ever said folks in Kansas wanted slavery.   But Davis is not going to tell you that.

Davis did early on claim 'states rights' occasionally, but he completely left that out about Kansas. States rights was fine -- but not for slavery. 


Hell, they boasted of killing to STOP States rights.  See for yourself.  

150 years of bullshit is enough.  

You only know what you are told, and no one told you this. Southern leaders -- the very top leaders, including Jeff Davis, the Vice President, the Secretary of State, and Davis own "General of Law and Order" boasted, yes boasted, they were killing to spread slavery.

Not sort of boast. Not kind of boast. Not "in a way".  They were joyous- - Atchison said it was the happiest time of his life, killing to spread slavery!

You may think Southern leaders were spreading slavery into areas where the citizens wanted it. Oh fuck no.  Oh hell no.

In fact Jeff Davis himself boasted he looked forward to the day the South would "by force of our arms"  reunite the states into all slave states.   Gee, I wonder why we are not shown that -- and many other, such speeches.

Lincoln's reaction to the "Kansas Act" actually defined his life from that point on.  Yet few historians cover it as such.  Just the mere discussion of it in the press bolted Lincoln out of his law practice, and into history. 

 The Missouri "compromise"  was no compromise at all (As Lincoln said "what compromise?). So why the fuck do your "history teachers" claim it was a compromise?

It was as much a compromise as a 7-11 robbery.

But  -- and this is the most amazing part of what your "history teacher" never tells you (because really, they are too stupid to figure it out), not long after the "COMPROMISE"   Southern slave power wanted more


How much more?   Consider this, Slave power already doubled their area -- and then doubled the area again, for slavery. All of it, by violence.   The Mexican War was the biggest violence -- and LIncoln correctly called President Polk on this war to expand slavery.

Hell, 90% of the history teachers do not even know the Mexican War was all about spreading slavery, and Lincoln, as freshman Congressmen, called Polk on it.

Do you know who else called Polk on it?  Henry Clay -- a Senator from Kentucky, a slave owner.  EVEN HE  knew the Mexican war was about doubling the size for slavery.   How the hell your "history" teachers missed this, is a mystery.

But AFTER -- remember this, AFTER they already doubled, and then redoubled, the size of slavery -- they wanted more.

Do not forget that. The Kansas Act came about because the South (well a few top leaders in the South) wanted more.  Do not let any one tell you this shit about KS act being about "popular sovereignty?

As Lincoln and others said, the Kansas Act was quite the opposite of popular sovereignty.    Yes, Lincoln said that -- and it was common knowledge.  

To prove that you-- remember thisL The Senator who got Kansas Act passed immediately -- immediately  -- left the Senate, went to Kansas, and started terrorizing there.   

The famous Crimes Against Kansas Act (I promise you, your history teacher will claim to know all about it) was by Charles Sumner. And his whole damn speech- was about this.  It was about David Rice Atchison leaving DC after passing the KS Act, and starting his killing and terrorizing in KS.

Was Sumner lying?

Was Atchison lying?   Atchison boasted about it, as you can tell by his speech.


Douglas himself let the "repeal" of the Missouri "Compromise"   but if you said this plainly,  you would say "Douglas  pushed the Kansas Act through because David Rice Atchison was going to take away his very powerful position as  Chairman of House and Senate Committee on Kansas.

This was common knowledge-- that Atchison pushed Douglas into pushing KS Act through.  Indeed, when Atchison first got to Kansas, and started his terrorizing, Douglas said that could not be true "A more gentle and patriotic man I have never seen in my life"  Douglas insisted.

Even after Atchison got the Lecompton debacle going, at first, Douglas defended Atchison, and on the Senate floor said to go ahead and accept that (which would make KS a slave state)   and later, we can fix any problems.

The outcry against Douglas was so great -- according to his own description -- that he literally could not get off the train from Baltimore to  Chicago, he was hung in effigy, He was taunted by the public.

By the time Douglas reached Chicago, it was clear to him, he could not support Atchison and his killers anymore, or he was dead politically.  So Douglas (IN PUBLIC)  did an about face.  He was against Lecompton after that train ride.

But behind the scenes, as Committee Chairman of both the House and Senate for Kansas issues, Douglas continued to support Atchison.  Atchison could not have been paid,  his men could not have been paid, if Douglas had prevented it.

He did not.

Douglas protested again, and again, that he was just for the "principle of self determination".   He specifically and repeatedly said no one expects Kansas to vote for slavery, that overwhelmingly Kansas would reject slavery.

The "Kansas Act"  was a violent ruse, said Lincoln and others. But we teach the KS act almost exactly as Jeff Davis and David Rice Atchison sold it, to start with.

Talk about fucking stupid. 

 It was born in violence, executed in violence, and will be maintained in violence. Lincoln pointed out again and again (somehow history teachers today seem to gloss over this) that Kansas Act was part of the violent "machinery"  that Southern leaders used to push slavery where they could not possibly push it, other than violence.

Lincoln knew what the fuck he was talking about, because Southern leaders were actually boasting themselves, in their own speeches, their own publications, their own war ultimatums, about spreading slavery by these exact means -- by violence, by Kansas Act, and soon, by the Dred Scott decision. 



Kansas vote against slavery changed everything. Yet most people have no idea Kansas already rejected slavery by the time Douglas and David Rice Atchison passed Kansas Act -- supposedly to allow Kansas to dright to decide their local institutions   Kansas citizens (white males) were against slavery, and voted as such, repeately by margins like 90 and 95% against slavery. 

But Kansas -- and the entire West, Southern leaders had long wanted for slavery.  Just like US used violence to steal land from Mexico to spread slavery in 1846  (Lincoln called President Polk on that theft, as you will see)  by 1852, the top Southern leaders were eager, and boasting, of getting Kansas and the West, too.

They didn't give a shit if the people in Kansas didn't want slavery.  They had ALWAYS spread slavery where it wasn't wanted. People today think slavery was voted in.  Oh hell no.  There was never an actual election in US history, where the citizens voted slavery in.

Each time, Southern leaders used terror, killing, torture, and complete control of the newspapers  -- even made it against the law to preach against slavery- - to push bloody slavery in.  

Kansas would show that -- mostly because of the telegraph.  Before, Southern leaders pushed slavery in by means "foul and more foul" then lied, and said the white citizens wanted it. That was never true. 

As Lincoln and many others knew, slavery was always spread by violence.  In his public speeches  Lincoln made this clear -- always spread by violence.  In his private letters, he made it even more clear.   

Furthermore, Southern leaders  were killing to spread slavery against -- that's right against -- state's rights.

 Not sorta. Not kinda. Not in a way.  Not from some "gotcha" out of context quote.   Very clearly, repeatedly, over time, in context, Southern leaders boasted -- boasted -- they were killing to spread slavery, and spread it against state's rights.

How do we know?  Because they bragged out the ass about it, until they lost.

Did you ever even hear of US Senator David Rice Atchison?  Probably not.  Yet no one,  not Stephen Douglas, not Jeff Davis, not Lincoln, came close to being as important a factor in the coming Civil War, as David Rice Atchison.

How the fuck you can get out of college, majoring in history, or even out of high school, without knowing what Atchison did, and boasted of, is an indictment on the stupidity, bullshit, and silliness of US text books.


Atchison is the guy -- according to Senator Charles Sumner and Atchison himself -- who got Kansas Act passed, by forcing Stephen A Douglas to go along with it.   Then he went to Kansas and started killing.   

Do you know what Kansas Act was?   Your teacher will tell you the bullshit, it was an effort to "resolve"  the "issue" of slavery.

Fuck no.  As Lincoln and others pointed out, quite correctly, Kansas Act was a violent effort to spread slavery AGAINST the will of the people, into Kansas and beyond.   
Lincoln could not have spoken about this any more, if he tried. Nearly every speech, most of every speech, was about Kansas Act and what that caused, and will cause in the future.  It defies understanding that "historians"  just ignore Lincoln's quite clear, quite correct, quite emphatic references to Kansas Act and later, Dred Scott.

Yet your history teacher will tell you, with a straight fact, he or she knows all about Kansas Act.  Really?   Then why not tell the students.   Kansas Act -- pushed through by Atchison himself, was clearly a violent effort to spread slavery.

And only idiots would disagree- - because Atchison boasted of it. Immediately after he passed Kansas Act, he rushed to Kansas, and started terrorizing, and later killing.

Supposedly, Kansas Act was going to "allow the citizens of Kansas to decide their local institutions" -- meaning slavery.


But 90% of white citizens in Kansas had ALREADY voted against slavery, would do repeatedly in the future. And Kansas was forever closed off from slavery, as part of the "Compromise" of 1850.    

The important thing about  the "Compromise of 1850" was not a compromise at all.  As Lincoln said "What compromise".  The South over doubled is area for slavery, against all laws and against the intent of the founding fathers.   Over and over again, this is what happened. Southern leaders demanded more area for slavery, and promised war to get it. Rather than fight it, the North gave in.


But now -- the South demanded drastically more.  All of Kansas territories, and all of the West.  Yes, they did.  Even more, Jeff Davis himself -- see  his speech below, boasted he would spread slavery in North by force of arms.  Or as he said it, he "looked forward" by our force of arms to establish slavery in the North, and make slavery of black race perpetual "SO THERE WILL BE NO MISUNDERSTANDING IN THE FUTURE

Sound like states rights to you?

Southern leaders -- and that meant only about 10 men, really -- demand slavery expand, no matter what the people of California or Kansas voted for.  No matter, even, when Kansas was admitted as a free state.  Look at the dates of Jeff Davis War Ultimatums -- after, yes after, yes after-- Kansas became a free state.
It was not just Kansas -- as as Southern leaders made clear, they wanted places that were already free states -- California an Oregon. So anyone who repeats the bullshit that Southern leaders gave a shit about states rights -- you don't have a clue what you are talking about.  Because at the time, Southern leaders were PROUD- - states had no rights to reject slavery, per Jeff Davis, and his use of Dred Scott decision.

 According to newspapers and Charles Sumner, Atchison not only got Kansas Act passed, the then rushed to Kansas, and (thanks to telegraph, the internet of its day) the world soon learned what Atchison was up to in Kansas.   He was not "letting the citizens" decide.  

Atchison led a group of paid killers into Kansas, with permission and pay from Jefferson Davis, then Secretary of War. Atchison was officially Jeff Davis personal "General of Law and Order" in Kansas.

And Atchison boasted out the ass about the whole thing.

DC for Kansas, where he started terrorizing and killing to spread slavery.   And he was proud as hell about it,. 

He boasted out the ass he was killing to spread slavery.  See his speech yourself. 

But he was not the only one boasting.  He was not some lone nut.  Jefferson Davis not only paid Atchison and his 800 men to invade Kansas in 1856,  Davis named Atchison "General of Law and Order"  in Kansas,  with the help of none other than Stephen A Douglas.  
Davis too boasted about killing to spread slavery later-- in his 1863 speech, about forcing slavery into the North and enslaving all blacks there, in perpetuity.

 We show both speeches.  

Your history books should have already show you Southern leaders War Ultimatums, speeches boasting of killing to spread slavery, and declaration that they will continue to kill, until slavery is spread to the North, and all the way to Pacific.

Very basic.  Who killed who, and why, is real history, everything else is bullshit.   Why are their OWN speeches not shown?

Because  Southern school boards have never allowed anything basic and truthful into school books, from the first moment US text books started, and they have only got more silly, more deceptive, since. 

If they had allowed the vile and violent things into text books, they would have been the first group ever to allow the ugly truth into their own text books.  It was not some conspiracy -- just normal human eagerness to blame someone else, and praise their own mythical heroes, never mind if those heroes were actually cowardly, cruel, and criminal.  

Southern newspapers headlines -- remember that, headlines -- boasted in 1861 that the "TRUE ISSUE"  was the spread of slavery into areas that already rejected slavery.

Let me repeat that -- Southern leaders BOASTED they were killing to spread slavery and BOASTED they spreading slavery into areas that were already free states, and free territories.





State's rights, stupid people say.  The South cared about "States rights".    Well, they sure had a funny way of showing it.  As soon as Kansas citizens voted to keep slavery OUT-- Jefferson Davis send David Rice Atchison out to Kansas to terrorize, and later kill, to prevent them from voting against slavery -- and to stop them from even speaking against slavery.

And David Rice Atchison was proud of it. Proud he was killing to spread slavery (he called it "the most joyus day of my life"  as you will see).  

Southern leaders at the time were not timid, or shy, or ashamed.  They had GOD on their side, they claimed, and GOD wanted blacks punished (yes, punished).  

Not some nuts in a bar.  The top Southern leaders -- Jefferson Davis, President, Alexander Stephens, Vice President, Robert Toombs, Secretary of CSA State, and David Rice Atchison, the Senator who got Kansas Act passed, bragged their asses off, loud, proud, incontext,  each in their own way, about killing to spread slavery.

That is- - until they lost,   Then like all cowards, all bullies -- these men all ran off during the Civil War, letting the fools to die and fight.  So fascinating to see, the men most screaming for violence, and boasting of violence, themselves ran away.  Even Jeff Davis.

Jeff Davis own wife exposed his cowardice. 

 Then, after they lost, they sang an entirely different tune.

It's about time we expose these men, just by showing what they bragged about, and did, at the time.  Not to blame anyone -though blame is justified.  But to set the record straight, to tell who killed who, and why.  

 And by the way, fuck those "historians" who never told you what Southern leaders did- - who they killed -- or what they bragged about, at the time.   The men who killed and tortured boasted of it. They were not timid or ashamed. 

But "historians" have laid on so much bullshit, that even if they mentioned who Southern leaders killed and boasted of killing, they did it at most in a sentence or two, in the back of their books, in throw away paragraphs.   Never did they present it honestly, simply, candidly. 

They just told you the bullshit the Southern leaders said later, after they lost. 

The amazing speeches about killing, torturing, spreading slavery, perpetual biblical punishment of black race, are so amazing, it's hard to believe you are reading SOUTHERN documents and SOUTHERN books, and SOUTHERN newspapers boasting of it, at the time.

No way - right?  We would have heard all about Southern leaders boasting of killing.  We would have heard all about Southern leaders bragging of spreading slavery so GOD could punish the black race for biblical sins.

Someone had to make this up -- right?  NO WAY!

Uh -- way. 


f you don't know Southern War Ultimatums -- of 1856 and 1861, you don't know shit about the Civil War.   

Southern leaders boasted about them, killed to bring the Ultimatums to pass, and boasted they were killing -- calling it war-- from 1856 on.

Not just some nut.  The most outspoken and proud killer, was a US Senator that you should know all about, but you don't.    You should know about him, because he....
  • Passed the Kansas Act 
  • Immediately went to Kansas
  • Officially Jeff Davis "General of Law and Order"
  • Started killing and terrorizing to spread slavery
  • Boasted of it, out the ass. 
  • His speech is below. 
  • Link is HERE


150 years of bullshit is enough.   Southern leaders bragged -- out the ass, loud and proud -- they were  killing in 1856, and they made it very clear, they were killing to spread slavery.

They called it war. I did not call it war, THEY did.

Not sorta, not kinda.  Very clearly it was war, and that is their word. War. A war to spread slavery to the Pacific, and to the North.  

Don't bother reading on, if swearing offends you. When you understand what happened, if you don't swear, you are a dumb ass. 

"You may think  you know what was going on leading up to the Civil War.   But unless you know about Southern War Ultimatums, and Senator David Rice Atchison -- you don't know shit."



You can check the reliability of nearly any US history book about the Civil War in about 20 seconds.   Go to the index,  see if they mention Southern War Ultimatums,  or David Rice Atchison as Jeff Davis "General of Law and Order". 

If they don't cover that, they are at best useless, and at worst, entirely bullshit. 

Passing the Kansas Act was a big fucking deal, as Lincoln and Jefferson Davis said, in their own words. Kansas Act opened up slavery into Kansas for a vote --and the guy who passed it, immediately goes to Kansas, officially as "General of Law and Order" .  There,  he kills and terrorizes anyone who dares speak, or publish anti slavery newspapers, and makes sure no one votes against slavery.

Very basic.  Very well known at the time.  I will type this slow so your history teacher can get it "The Senator who passed Kansas Act immediately rushed out to Kansas, hired 800 men, and there boasted he was killing to spread slavery and silence all opposition to slavery". 


"Who killed who, and why, is real history. Everything else is bullshit"


Southern War Ultimatums?  Yes, Southern leaders issued War Ultimatums.  Loudly, proudly, in headlines, and in speeches. Atchison boasted of his War Ultimatums, and made his hired men promise to draw blood that day, and boasted the Confederate flag was red in color, for the blood they would spill to spread slavery.

Boasted of killing to spread slavery -- not a nut in a bar, but the Senator that passed Kansas Act, then goes immediately to Kansas with hired killers, paid by Jefferson Davis. And Atchison acts with official approval -- from Jeff Davis, then Secretary of War.

Think of that -- the man who got Kansas Act passed in Congress, immediately goes to Kansas, and there boasts of killing to spread slavery.  He creates his own "legislature" by violence, and immediately passes laws making it a crime to speak or publish anything against slavery.

Kind of a BFD.  Go see if you can find that stated candidly in any US text book.  Good luck, we tried. It's not there.


It's in Southern speeches, Southern books, Southern newspapers, boasting of it at the time.   The vile like shit done and boasted of by Southern leaders has never been in US text books, because crybabies and liars in the South, mostly on Southern school boards, were not about to let the ugly truth about their heroes get taught to anyone, if they could stop it.


Do you have any clue what those War Ultimatums were?  Lincoln sure knew.  Southern leaders knew -- they were proud of it. They boasted of those War Ultimatums, until they lost.

As you will see,  Southern War Ultimatums, every one, were  about spread of slavery into places that had rejected slavery. Jefferson Davis, in his own book,  made it very clear.  The SPREAD of slavery into Kansas, even after (yes after) Kansas became a free state, was the only way to avoid war.   The resistance to slavery into Kansas even after (yes after!) Kansas became a free state, was "THE INTOLERABLE GRIEVANCE" 

Davis did not just talk about it, did not just write about it. Davis sent 800 paid killers to Kansas in 1856, under a man he officially named "General of Law and Order in Kansas".

That man, David Rice Atchison, a US Senator who passed the Kansas Act with Stephen A Douglas, boasted he was there to kill to spread slavery, and he would KEEP killing until slavery was spread to the Pacific.

It's about time someone told you. So we will.   

They boasted of it then -- out the ass, loud proud boasting, backed up by killing and torture.  Why the fuck is it not even mentioned in US history text books?  Because for 150 years, and to this day, right now, Southern liars and crybabies have never allowed anything in US history text books about the ISIS like, creepy, violent, and religious based crap Southern leaders did, and boasted of, at the time.

That's why. 

  No one told you this, did they?   Southern leaders -- officially, loudly, proudly, repeatedly, boasted or justified killing to spread slavery, until they lost.

Not kind of, not sort of, not a few nuts.  

Southern leaders officially boasted of killing to spread slavery, from Jefferson Davis on down, until they lost.  Not out of context "gotcha"  moments. Not moments of passion.  Southern leaders repeatedly, carefully, with thought and purpose, demanded the violent spread of slavery -- and demanded it, against (yes against) states rights.

It's fucking time you knew.  

Think the Civil War started in 1861?

The only way you can say the Civil War started in 1861, is to be stupid about what Southern leaders boasted of, in 1856.

Southern leaders -- the ones doing the killing at the time -- boasted they were at war already, and at war to spread slavery.  

Maybe they fucking knew what they were talking about -- they boasted of it, at the time. Remember that.

  A war "for the entire South"  with support from the top Southern leaders, including (especially) Jefferson Davis.

What Southern leader bragged about  --  until they lost. 

No one made them say it -- they boasted of it.

Of all those boasting of killing to spread slavery  -- ironically, none boasted more than the US Senator who passed the Kansas Act.   Your history teacher probably told you the Kansas Act was passed to "deal with the issue of popular sovereignty in Kansas".

Actually, the guy who passed Kansas Act, left DC immediately, according to Senator Charles Sumner, to invade Kansas and there kill and torture.

Ironically, Atchison did not deny that, he boasted of it.  Remember that, what Sumner accused Atchison of, Atchison did not deny, he boasted of it.

Maybe someone should tell your history teacher that the man who passed Kansas Act, immediately left Washington, rushed to Kansas, and there started terrorizing, later killing, and all the while boasting he was killing to spread slavery. 

And if you don't believe that -- see his own speech boasting about it, and learn what the facts were. He was boasting of doing exactly what was reported at the time -- the killings and tortures of people in Kansas who had already voted to keep slavery out of Kansas, and would have to fight a four year war to stop Atchison and his killers, long before 1861.

The last of three invasions into Lawrence.

Survivors of Atchison's raids 
gathered for a reunion in 1895.
 Tell them Kansas Act was passed to let Kansas folks "settle domestic issues with perfect freedom" 



Southern leaders -- loud, proud, clear as hell -- boasted they were killing to spread slavery.  Not sorta, not kinda, not in a way.

From 1856 on, Southern leaders boasted about killing to spread slavery.  Some boasted they killed to spread slavery for GOD -- others for white control of blacks, others boasted they did it for the wealth.  

But they all boasted. And they all made it clear -- they boasted they were killing, and would continue to kill, until slavery was spread to the Pacific-- and in the North.

Yes -- see below, Jeff Davis own papers, shows his speech boasting he would spread slavery into the NORTH.



For a time -- until they lost -- Southern leaders were open, and boasting, of spreading slavery, and spreading it by Kansas Act, Dred Scott decision, and by  VIOLENCE.

Lincoln and others spoke of this. OFTEN.  Lincoln made it clear, but you have to read the entire speech, that Southern leaders were using violence, and every possible "machinery" -- specifically Dred Scott and Kansas Act, which were themselves violent, as you will see.


Real history is this -- who killed who, and why.

All else is bullshit.  Even if the bullshit is partly true, it's still bullshit.  Get who killed who, and why, correct,  then add all the bullshit  you want.

Unfortunately, Southern school boards have made damn sure the vile nature of their heroes -- like Davis -- boasting of killing to spread slavery, never got to the text books.   Instead, in Orwellian nonsense, you might see Davis say "All we ask, is to be left alone".

Actually Davis was one that boasted of violence to SPREAD slavery and send 800 -1000 killers to Kansas in 1856, under the paid leadership of US Senator David Rice Atchison,  Jeff Davis college friend, and fellow slave owner.

   Instead, in Orwellian nonsense, you might see Davis say "All we ask, is to be left alone".

Strange (not really) boasting of killing to spread slavery, and Southern War Ultimatums, never did quite make it into US history text books.  Gee, it's almost like the Southern school boards didn't want this kind of publicity. 


When you inform folks of the speeches from Southern leaders boasting of killing to spread slavery, invariably the person will tell you something like "Oh there were nutty people then, yeah, but that's not what Southern leaders were up to".

Hey, dumb ass, this WAS the Southern leaders.  This was Jefferson Davis himself, boasting of killing to spread slavery North.

This was the US Senator who got Kansas Act passed, then rushed out to Kansas and started killing and terrorizing there.

This was the Vice President of the Confederacy, boasting they were spreading "God's"  type of slavery -- perpetual punishment of the black race, all over the world, for blacks biblical sins.

Yeah, crazy crazy shit.  But it only SOUNDS crazy because no one told you.


You just were not told about it. Remember this -- they did not admit it, they BOASTED OF IT.    What Southern leaders boasted out the ass about, till they lost. 



Oh, really?

Most folks insist that Southern leaders cared about "State's rights". 

Funny you should mention that, because when Kansas rejected slavery, and tried to become a free state officially, Jefferson Davis first sent the US military to KS to stop that, and when he could not get the soldiers to kill, he sent killers there, led by US Senator Davis Rice Atchison.

Furthermore, according to Davis, states have no rights to keep slavery out- - after Dred Scott. When did he say that?  In his own damn book, that's where.   And at the time, he said so, and Davis did have a logic -- Orwellian double speak -- that he claimed made it a crime NOT to spread slavery.

Let me repeat that, Davis came up with Orwellian double speak that not only justified the violence he paid others to commit in Kansas, but logic that would, as he boasted of, spread slavery into the North, as God intended.

Gee, when you leave just a few "details" about Davis actions and writings, you don't know what the fuck you are talking about.  So we put in the little "details" that Jefferson Davis himself thought were so important -- until he lost.



The logic?  Blacks were not people -- there were "inferior beings"   and therefore the Supreme Court ordered -- see the order below-- the federal government to "protect slavery" even in areas that rejected slavery

Donald Trump's boasts have nothing on Southern leaders- - and some Southern leaders had that extra measure, they were killing for GOD.  Even Trump has not gone there -- yet.

Southern leaders BOASTED they were killing -- see their documents below-- to spread slavery. They were not ashamed, not timid. They boasted about it.

No one could "destroy or impair"   any "right to property in slaves"  including taking their property to where they please.

Slaves were property - NOT HUMAN BEINGS -- not persons. Specifically, in clear language, not persons.  This "property" was not "beings" protected by Declaration of Independence or the Constitution. They were "inferior class"  and shall be recognized as property. 

You can disagree with blacks not being human -- the point is, Southern leaders boasted, very clearly, loud and proud, that was their logic of sending killers to Kansas, and demanding the spread of slavery,   states rights go fuck yourself.  States, HAD NO RIGHTS to keep slavery out, by logic of Dred Scott.

Davis wrote "Dred Scott decision placed slave property on exactly the same basis with that of land, houses, and all other property.

This is from HIS OWN BOOK. 

Southern RIGHTS -- Southern Honor -- said Southern leaders, and even the survival of the white race, depended on spreading slavery into Kansas and beyond.

That's not what I say, that is what they boasted about at the time. 

Not just for Southern Honor. Not just for spread of slavery, they were doing all this -- for GOD.

Most amazing of all Southern leaders, in the boasting of killing department -- was the same US Senator, David Rice Atchison,  who passed the Kansas Act.    Immediately after he passed the Kansas Act, Atchison personally went to Kansas, with hired men - and invaded cities to punish anyone who tried to vote to get Kansas accepted as a free state.

Most "history teachers"  will tell you some bullshit that the "Kansas Act" was put forth so Kansas folks would be "perfectly free" to "decide local institution as (slavery) for themselves. 

But as Lincoln and many others said, hundreds of times, Kansas Act was actually the opposite.   A ruse to open up Kansas to the possibility of slavery -- then use violence to prevent Kansas citizens from even speaking against slavery.

To not understand that Lincoln (and hundreds of others) were right -- Kansas Act was "violence" to spread slavery -- you have to be ignorant of five years of killing,torture, and terror, started by Atchison and his paid men/

It's time you, and your "history teacher" learned what Southern leaders boasted of -- until they lost.


Do you know who Senator Atchison was?  Probably the most important man in US history in 1854, through 1858, but even most "history teachers" use him only as a trivia question, as supposedly being President of US for one day.

No, he was never President.   

NO one ever told you that Southern leaders -- from Texas and Virginia, went to Missouri, made that a slave state by violence, then almost killed and tortured enough there, to make Kansas a slave state.

Idiotically, most people just assume slavery spread by peaceful means -- that is, whites were not killing other whites, to spread slavery.

The truth is, slavery was ALWAYS spread by whites killing anyone in their way, including other whites.    Kansas maybe the most important.


Atchison -- from Texas, but became a US Senator in Missouri -- had one big wish in life. To spread slavery to the rest of the US -- South, North, West.   And he said so.

The "happiest day of my life"  Atchison told his newly hired Texas men - is to invade Kansas and kill everyone who defended the newspaper that published anti slavery papers.

Atchison made it illegal -- in his bogus legislature -- to publish ant-slavery papers.



 US Senator that got Kansas Act passed, then immediately went to Kansas, started his violent invasions of cities in Kansas, and almost made Kansas a slave state, even though 95% of Kansas citizens voted against slavery -- before Atchison got there, and after,

Atchison hired 800--1000 men, using federal money sent to him by Jefferson Davis -- to invade Kansas.   Most history teachers stupidly assume, if they know about Atchison at all, that there were hundreds of white people in Kansas who wanted slavery.

Fuck no, there were not. Atchison had to HIRE most of his men.  If you remember nothing else, remember that.  The man who passed Kansas Act, immediately went to Kansas, and used HIRED men to invade cities, and terrorize, later kill, people there.

It's time for text books to mention the man invaded Kansas.  Well known then, almost completely, and stupidly ignored now.



1856 & 1861

Senator Atchison's speech, while profoundly important -- and entirely overlooked in any US text book, is just the tip of the iceberg.

He was by no means alone.  He was simply the official leader in this first raid into Kansas.  He worked officially for -- as you will see -- and made reports to, Jefferson Davis,

Atchison boasted this was war -- and his ads in Southern papers (he hired 800-1000 men from the South) made it clear, this was war.  The time for talk was done. This is the time for blood.



Jeff Davis supported Atchison -- officially, then and later. In fact, Atchison sent reports of the progress of his killing sprees, to Davis -- see below.

Davis paid for Atchison -- and paid for his men, who Atchison hired in 1856, from Texas and South Carolina. If you hear anything about Kansas in most text books, you will see nonsense like "Trouble in Kansas"   and nothing about who was killing who, and why.

Atchison went to Kansas- - hired 800-1000 men, and invaded Lawrence Kansas, eventually burning it to the ground.   And he boasted of it.

Your text book will make it seem like "both sides refused to compromise".   What bullshit, Kansas citizens were just glad to be alive at first, and only repeated killings -- by Atchison's men -- induced them finally to fight back.

In fact, Atchison boasted (like Jefferson Davis boasted) that Yankees would "not fight back".  You don't hear this now, but Southern leaders were quite proud of it then.  People in the North were afraid of Southern leaders.  Not only were they slave owners, used to whipping blacks, but Southern leaders were loud and threatening.   

The US Senator beaten on Senate floor -- do you know what he was talking about, in the speech he was beaten for?

He was talking about his Senate colleague, David Rice Atchison.  His two day speech detailed the killings and tortures, by the Atchison and his men.  Yes, it did. Read the Crimes against Kansas Speech.   Hour after hour, Sumner was speaking in great detail of Atchison and his men, killing and torturing in Kansas.

Your "history teacher" will claim he knows all about Crimes Against Kansas Act, yet has no clue what Sumner was talking about, in great detail. He was talking about Atchison, and his paid killers.'

One of surviving Atchison reports
to Jeff Davis.

Sumner beaten on Senate floor, after speaking in great detail, for two days, about Atchison and his men's crimes.

No one has the right to reject slavery -- not the people of Kansas, not the Congress, not by popular vote, not by state, city, county legislatures.

Slavery is a "sacred right" -- God intended the white man to enslave the black man as punishment to the black race.

The federal government  MUST protect slavery in Kansas, arrest those who publish anti-slavery newspapers,  and kill those who resist.

Never mind that Kansas citizens voted 95%a against slavery, before and and after Atchison went there to kill.  

 Atchison was not ashamed -- of any of it.

Atchison was not ashamed -- he was proud of it.  Atchison boasted of doing the things he was accused of,  and promised a lot more killing, if slavery did not spread.

Atchison's own speech is so amazing, it's hard to pick out the most horrific part -- boasting of killing, promises of endless killing, bragging that he works for the "entire South", etc etc.

And he made it clear, he will send "into hell" anyone who tries to have a free state near Missouri.   As you will see, 90% of the whites in Kansas did not want slavery, and finally became a free state by 90 and 95% votes.

Atchison did all he possibly could -- to stop that.

And he almost succeeded.


 No one alive in 1856 -1865 would have been at all surprised that Southern leaders boasted of killing to spread slavery.  In fact, Southern War Ultimatums -- WAR ULTIMATUMS -- not suggestions, published in 1861, were about that exact thing -- the thing Atchison was killing for, in 1856, Southern leaders still demanded, in 1861 -- the SPREAD OF SLAVERY.


The time for debate is over, Atchison yelled in speeches and in writing.  This is the time to kill.  To "kill every damn abolitionist in Kansas".   Atchison, as you will see, in his speech, made all the men promise to draw blood -- to use their swords to spill abolition blood -- that very day.

Not protection of slavery -- the violent SPREAD of slavery. 

Kansas citizens voted 90 and 95% against slavery, in two separate elections, and Kansas became a free state under President Buchanan, early in 1861.  


1) Atchison is the guy who got Kansas Act.  

2) Atchison had to HIRE men to do his dirty work.

3) Atchison got the money from Jefferson Davis.

4) Atchison officially worked for Jefferson Davis.

5) Jefferson Davis openly and officially supported Atchison.

6) Atchison would always "disappear" during any fighting, and essentially deserted during the Civil War.


Atchison left immediately upon passing the Kansas Act, as newspapers show, and as Charles Sumner spoke about in his famous speech. Atchison went to Kansas, and there, started his killing sprees, and acts of terror.

Why? Why did Atchison leave DC so quickly -- perhaps the same night Kansas Act passed?

Here is why.  A few months before, Kansas declared itself -- by 90% vote -- a free state.

Kansas was about to send paperwork to Washington to be officially in the Union, as a free state.  

See for yourself. 


 When Kansas citizens officially announced they would apply to be a free state -- no one even pretended Kansas citizens were pro slavery.   There were only two slaves in the entire state -- and slavery was outlawed there already.

In elections that followed-- 90 and 95% of the white male citizens voted against slavery. 

Before Kansas would OFFICIALLY become a free state -- Atchison rushed to Kansas, and almost used enough violence and terror (see him boast about it) to force slavery down their throats.



Atchison was not ashamed - whatsoever.   He worked for -- openly, and with the public support of Jefferson Davis, then US Secretary of War.

In fact, Davis had first tried to use the military to break up any efforts to publically apply as a free state.  But while the military broke up meetings, per Davis orders, they would not do the dirty work that Davis wanted done - to silence, by force, newspapers and any voting, against slavery.

Soon after Atchison was in Kansas, Davis officially named him, of all things "General of Law and Order In Kansas Territory".  None other than Stephen A Douglas -- Chairman of the House and Senate Committee on Kansas, and Atchison's business partner, made no objection, and Atchison officially became a General -- in a made up position, "General of Law and Order".


 Atchison made defending him difficult -- a loud mouth, sort of like Donald Trump, Atchison boasted of things that normal killers would deny.  He  boasted of the violence, and boasted of the goal - to spread slavery. 

 He  bragged about things that were common knowledge then -- see hundreds of newspapers at the time, telling of the violence, including Congressional hearings on the violence. 

Charles Sumner, the US Senator beaten almost to death on the Senate floor  -- ever hear of  him? 

You may have heard of the Senator beaten almost to death on Senate floor -- but do you know who Sumner was speaking of, in the speech he was beaten for?

Sumner was beaten for the SPEECH ABOUT ATCHISON.

That's right, Sumner's famous "Crimes Against Kansas Speech" was about Atchison and his hired men, killing and torturing in Kansas. 

Ironically, two days earlier, Atchison himself gave a speech to his men, boasting of killing and torturing.  So Sumner was exactly right.

Sumner's paid men cheered him.  He was the hero and darling of the South. Jefferson Davis defended men -- paid him, and paid all his hired men.   Davis said everything Atchison did was "CONSTITUTIONALLY REQUIRED" 

Even after -- remember that -- even after Kansas became a free state, Southern leaders killed, and boasted of killing, to spread slavery into KANSAS.  Specifically KANSAS.

The fact no US text book explains this in clear terms -- using  bullshit like " Trouble in Kansas" -- instead of "Southern leaders go to Kansas and Kill to Spread Slavery" -- shows you how watered down our text books are, not to offend Southern leaders.

Other speeches, documents, and other Southern papers, boasted of killing to spread slavery.   Boasted they were doing the will of GOD to enslave blacks, and boasted they would keep killing until slavery is spread to all of the US.

Even Jeff Davis got into the boasting -- boasting of "by force of arms"  putting blacks in the North "back on the slave status" in perpetuity.

The shit you text book "forgot" to mention.


Oh, and here is a picture of the survivors of Atchison's first raid into Kansas, later in life (1895). 


Top Southern leaders -- including Jeff Davis -- boast about spreading slavery into states that rejected slavery -- BY FORCE.

That they even used force -- killing, torture, and drownings -- may surprise you, but it should not. They boasted of it, at the time.  Not kind of, not sort of, not in a way.

Loud, proud, in context, from the roof-tops, Donald Trump like boasting. 

Southern school boards, however, have never allowed this or other vile truths about Southern leaders into any US national text book, because the publishers were based in Texas, and the publishers did not want to have two or twenty different versions.  So as a practical matter, Texas School Boards not only edited what Texas kids learned, for over 100 years, Texas and the South has had a strangle hold on what anyone learned in US national text books.

See what those lying cowardly bastards kept out of text books.


Southern leaders, just before and during the Civil War, boasted of killing to spread slavery.    Not just spread slavery -- but boasted of spreading it, by force, into areas that were already free states, and already voted to keep slavery out.

So when Lincoln -- as he did dozens of times -- mentions the South was spreading slavery by "machinery"  into all of the United States -- he wasn't fucking kidding, and he was not fucking wrong.

Southern leaders -- you will see below -- bragged of exactly that.



If you don't know about Southern War Ultimatums,  you can't understand US history, Lincoln or the Civil War.

It's not conjecture or overstatement to say Southern leaders were proud of killing to spread slavery- - because the leaders gave speeches justifying it, or actually boasting about it, including written and official documents.

For example, Jeff Davis, in his own book "Rise and Fall" explained rather clearly, he had every right to send killers into Kansas, because Kansas rejected slavery.

No, Davis did not admit in those candid terms (that he killed or sent killers, but that is what he did).  But Davis did make it clear that Kansas resistance to slavery was "INTOLERABLE GRIEVANCE"

Remember -- KANSAS was already a free state by the time Davis issued his war ultimatums ABOUT KANSAS. Specifically, Southern War Ultimatums said Kansas must accept and respect slavery -- they had no right to keep slavery out!!

Davis wrote that -- in his own book!   No, he did not bother to explain Kansas was already a free state by then, or that Kansas citizens rejected slavery by 90% and 95% vote.

But everyone already knew that Kansas was a free state, by the time Davis even wrote that.  Davis was under no obligation to tell the full truth -- but he wanted to make clear, and did make clear what everyone already knew -- that the South hated Kansas citizens, and denied their right to keep slavery OUT -- by vote, they had no right. By their legislature, they had no right.

By any means -- Kansas citizens had no right to reject slavery.

Sound like state's rights to you?

Davis did have a "logic"  to argue Kansas citizens had no rights to reject slavery, see if you can guess what it is. He said it, he wrote it, he tried to justify his killing and sending killers to KS -- and he wrote that justification in his own book.

If your teacher -- or you -- knew the basics, you would know Jeff Davis "logic" of why Kansas citizens, even by 95% vote, had no right to keep slavery out, and that they kept slavery out was "INTOLERABLE".

And upon those "intolerable grievance"  Davis and Southern leaders issued their WAR ULTIMATUMS.

Not sorta. Not kinda. Not in a way. Loud- - proud, clear-- backed up by killing and torture - war ultimatums. 


But from the start of national text books -- guess who had stangle hold on the words used in US text books?  Southern crybabies.  They were not about to let any text book in their school that told, for example, of Lee's torture of slave girls, or Southern leaders boasting killing to spread slavery.

They were not about to let anything published -- text books were actually printed in Texas, for the most part -- that told about Jeff Davis cowardice, telling his wife to get herself killed, then running away in her dress.

Nor would they allow Southern leaders very clear, repeated, and proud announcements, be put in text books -- even pronoucenments cheered by Southern people at the time -- that they created a country based on GODs wish to punish blacks.

Yeah -- thats right. Southern leaders boasted they had created a country literally BASED on Gods will to punish the black race in perpetuity, for biblical sin.



Sadly, US text books have never published Southern War Ultimatums, and "historians" have never written about them candidly.  Over and over, for whatever reasons, US historians have not dealt with what Lincoln had to deal with -- a violent, ISIS like Southern group of men, small number of men actually, who controlled the South. 

Just the opposite, most "historians"  will actually pay homage in one way or another, to men who had slave girls tortured, who bought children, bought kidnapped women, etc. As you will see, some Southern leaders bought kidnapped women.

But you will hear crap like they were "just doing what they believed in"  -- and yet, they will not tell you what they did.  Clearly the "historians" like Foner, McPherson, Catton should know what Southern leaders did.  If so, why did they never put down candidly, in a meaningful way, anything about Southern War Ultimatums, and leaders boast of killing, promises of endless killing, to spread slavery, for GOD and white superiority.

Hang on to your hat.   And if you have a history degree, but never heard of this, go slap your teacher.  

Southern leaders boasted about about it -- repeatedly, loudly, proudly, in context. 

Southern leaders were not ashamed- - remember, they said God wanted slavery. They enslaved blacks,and created a nation based on slavery, said their Vice President, on "the great truth" that blacks are  inferior beings -- ordained by God to be punished by slavery.

That's just one of the many many ISIS like quotes by Southern leaders at the time, in their own books, in their own speeches, in their own documents.  Clear, in context, repeated boasting -- boasting -- of killing to spread slavery, boasting of torture, boasting that it did not matter if Kansas rejected slavery by 95% vote.

State's rights?  Not after Kansas rejected slavery!  Immediately, as you will see, that whole "state rights" excuse was gone.  Instantly, and necessarily, Davis changed is excuse to send killers to Kansas from 'states rights"  to "blacks are not persons"  excuse.

Kansas -- as you will see -- had no right, even by 95% vote-- to keep slavery out.  Even after, yes after, Kansas became a free state, Jeff Davis issued war ultimatums that Kansas accept and respect slavery.

Not sorta, not kinda. This is what Southern leaders boasted of at the time.  Until they lost, Southern leaders boasted about things you have never read in a US text book.

Officially paid by Jeff Davis.
Sent reports on progress of killings -- to Davis.
Supported in public -- by Davis

When asked after the war if he supported had  Atchison terrorizing in Kansas 1856 on -  Davis simply said Atchison only did what was

 "Constitutionally required" 


 Who killed who -- and why, leading up to the Civil War.



Did you know about the US Senator, the same Senator who passed the Kansas Act,  also  boasted he was leading the  "war" to spread slavery "for the entire South"  in 1856?

Repeal Missouri "compromise".  It would help if you knew the "Compromise" was more like an armed robbery at a 7-1l, (as Lincoln said, 'what compromise').  The South, in the "Compromise" got to almost triple the size of slave states and territories,  in return for leaving Kansas to California alone.  No slavery there.

Not long after the South almost tripled it's slave territory, Southern leaders wanted MORE.  They wanted Kansas and California, as Atchison himself made very clear (see below).

Atchison had to "undo" the "compromise" -- in order to spread slavery, as he boasted of.

Here, papers at the time, show Senator Atchison boasting of pushing Douglas to pass Kansas Act -- remember, Atchison then rushed to Kansas and started his violence there, with men paid for, by Jefferson Davis.  See if you can guess why Atchison would rush to Kansas, day after he got Kansas Act passed?

Go on, take your time.  He had a reason -- and a mission. And he was paid, officially on the federal payroll, as "General of Law and Order In Kansas"  per order of Jefferson Davis, Secretary of War.

This is the kind of shit your history teacher has no clue of, but would be embarrassed if you knew that much more than he/she. 

Did Douglas not know Atchison was going to do exactly as he did -- rush to Kansas and start is killing sprees there?  

For that -- everyone knew exactly what happened, because Douglas was Atchison's business partner, and Atchison boasted he got Douglas to do it -- Douglas was for a time, easily the most hated man in America.

Douglas himself -- he told the story -- was "hung in effigy"  and "burned in effigy"  at every stop along the rail road line he took from Washington, back to Chicago.  Douglas said he "could read the newspaper"  from the lights of him burning in effigy, all along the track!

No one knows if Douglas knew beforehand, that Atchison would rush out to Kansas the next day, but Atchison did.

And Douglas, for a long time, supported Atchison.  He told folks Atchison as "the most patriotic and kind man I have ever known"  and insisted Atchison would never do such violence.

Trouble was -- Atchison was boasting about it, and because of the internet of the day, the whole country knew what Atchison was doing.

The public was so incensed at his support for Atchison,  even to pass the KS act, that Douglas could not get off the train, and was surrounded at station after station, hung in effigy, burned in effigy. 

By the time Douglas's train reached Chicago, Douglas knew  his career was over -- maybe he would not be able to live in the North, hatred of him was so  high for support of Atchison, that Douglas had no choice but to finally -- after first supporting Atchison -- come out in speeches decrying Atchison.

Behind the scenes, however, Douglas still helped Atchison for at least two years.



Your text book will repeat Douglas's speeches -- over, and over and over, Douglas claimed all he wanted was "Kansas voters to have the right to decide their own institutions" (meaning slavery.).

But Douglas passed Kansas Act -- shortly after first passing the Missouri Compromise, which banned slavery in Kansas, in exchange for the South getting huge parts of US for slavery. In other words, the South demanded the spread of slavery -- but said they would leave Kansas and Nebraska alone.

Your history book calls it a "COMPROMISE"   but as Lincoln said "What compromise".  As much a "compromise" as an armed robbery at a 7-11.

Douglas pushed that "Compromise" through, and boasted repeatedly no one would be foolish or vile enough to ever undo it.

Not long after -- guess who came forward, to undo the Missouri Compromise?  Stephen A Douglas, the guy who got it passed (with others) in the first place.

Almost overnight -- Douglas went from boasting Missouri Compromise was bed rock and forever - into leading the way to destroy it.   Bet no one told you that.

Douglas was pressured by none other than David Rice Atchison.

And as we see, Atchison, immediately upon passing of Kansas Act, rushed to Kansas and started his killing and terrorizing there.


See his speech. And see Davis absolute defense of anything Atchison did as "Constitutionally required" 

Atchison was proud -- loud, and joyous. The "happiest day of my life"  Atchison told his men, is the day they will invade Kansas and there kill anyone who resisted them, and shut down all newspapers who dared publish anything against slavery.

Remember -- Atchison was the guy, just months before, was in the US Senate pushing Kansas Act through the Senate.  Supposedly Kansas Act was going to give Kansas citizens "the absolute right to choose for themselves, what their domestic instutitions should be.

And Kansas citizesn DID decide, then and later, is repeated elections -- they rejected slavery overwhelmingly.   Atchison would terrorize and kill there, use his hired men (yes, he paid them)  to establish what is now called "bogus legislature"  which made it a crime to speak publically, or write publically, against slavery.

In fact, Atchison's first killing spree, with his hired men, he boasted they were going to shut down the newspaper and kill anyone who resisted. He also boasted (see for yourself)  that they will keep killing till slavery is spread to the Pacific Ocean.

Then remember -- this was the US Senator who got Kansas Act passed to give everyone the "right" to vote.

Atchison boasts they will be "amply paid"?

He also makes it clear, he and they work "for the entire South". 

1856 -1856 -1856 -1856 -1856 -1856 -1856 -1856 -1856 -1856 -1856 -1856 -1856 -1856 -1856 -

Remember, this is 1856. Four years before Lincoln even run for President. Southern leaders are already killing, and already calling it a wary.



When Lincoln spoke or wrote about the Kansas Act, he referred to it as a violence.   See his letter, below.  He was, of course, exactly right, and Southern leaders boasted it was violence. 

Lincoln and others spoke of things that Southern leaders were boasting about, in case anyone thinks Lincoln exggerated -- if anything, Lincoln tried not to piss off the ISIS like Southern leaders any more than he had to.

But these killing sprees are what Lincoln he was talking about -- not theoretical violence, but ongoing, active violence. And Atchison speech, and his friend's publications, boasted of the violence, promised endless killing.

Atchison did not have volunteers -- he paid these men.   Atchison did not pay them from his own pocket, and he made clear, the men are to be "amply paid"  by the "present administration.

Atchison was the same Senator who passed Kansas Act, telling folks they passed it so the people of Kansas would be "perfectly free"  to decide "domestic institutions(slavery) themselves?

Yet this Senator, officially working for, paid by, and reporting to Jefferson Davis, went to Kansas immediately after passing the Kansas Act.  He did so with hired men.  And the stated purpose was to spread slavery "To the Pacific"

And he boasted about it.  

Atchison also sent regular reports to Davis on the progress of his killings and terror.   Atchison was officially "General of Law and Order in Kansas Territory"  per Jefferson Davis.

Atchison was also Stephen A Douglas business partner, and the man Atchison had spearhead passing Kansas Act -- never mind that Douglas himself said no one would ever been foolish or vile enough to undo Missouri Compromise (not really a compromise, but demands by the South to spread slavery and double the size of slavery territory, in 1850.).

But a few weeks later, Douglas was hell bent for leather to pass Kansas Act.  The country would learn why, about a year later. 

You never read it in any any US text book.  None of the major "historians" ever mentioned it.



Atchison's full speech here 



You should know all this, but you don't.

You can't know. It's not in any -- any -- US text book.  North or South. High school or college, at least not in a clear way.

Instead, you will find nonsense about "Trouble in Kansas"  that mentions Atchison's "supporters" who "supported slavery".

As if the "trouble" fell from the sky, and no one with a name did anything.  Actually, David Rice Atchison passed Kansas Act in Senate - then according to Senator Charles Sumner -- Atchison left immediately.   He turned up about a week later in Missouri, broke into an armory, and with hundreds of paid men, invaded Kansas.

Jefferson Davis, officially, sends a US Senator to KS in 1856, and that Senator is the one who got Kansas Act passed. See below.

That's not just nameless "trouble".   That's paid killers invading Kansas.

Yet your "history teacher" won't know who did what. Typically a history teacher will tell you "There was plenty of blame to go around".  They won't even know Atchison was boasting of it.  Or that he paid the men -- there were no volunteers to do Atchison's dirty work, he had to hire them, so he did.

Furthmore, Atchison boasted what he was doing.

He was not ashamed of it.   He and the South were proud of it.



 Atchison paid the men, or that he worked for and reported to Jeff Davis. You will not learn he passed Kansas Act -- and you will not learn he and others boasted of the killings.

You will not learn Atchison issued (see below) his own proud War Ultimatums, in 1856, during his first invasion of Kansas, as all Southern leadership would do in 1861,  per Richmond newspapers, boasting about it at the time.

The War Ultimatums?  In 1856 and 1861, were nearly identical -- we demand the spread of slavery into Kansas and the West.  Atchison 1000 men could not get the job done in 1856, so he promised to get 5000 men and just "kill them all"  as you will see.


Atchison was Jeff Davis official "General of Law and Order in Kansas Territory".    Furthermore Davis made sure all information about the killing sprees in Kansas, got to the President thruoug Davis himself.



This was a smart plan, and it almost worked.  But Davis and Atchison were too late  -- already 30,000 or so white citizens of Kansas were there -- and they already voted against slavery. Overwhelmingly Kansas white males were against slavery.

And unlike what Atchison boasted of, Kansas men did not just run away.  Especially after Atchison's men killed John Brown's son -- Frederick (named after Frederick Douglass) John Brown did fight back.  And Kansas men realized Atchison's tough guys were not that tough, after all.   Atchison himself would run away.



Nor will you learn that Charles Sumner, US Senator from Massachusetts, was himself beaten on the floor of the US Senate.




Do you know who Sumner was talking about?  
He was talking -- for hours -- about what David Rice Atchison was doing in Kansas. Hour, after hour, after hour, detail, after detail, after detail, Sumner was talking about David Rice Atchison and his paid killers. 

That Senator, in Kansas, not only terrorized and had  his men kill citizens of Kansas, he boasted he was killing, he boasted he would continue to kill until slavery was spread to all of the West -- including into states that were already free states.

And there is much much more -- Atchison boasts who pays the men,  and  Atchison sent reports to Davis on the progress of the killings.

That's right, Atchison (the Senator who passed the Kansas Act) sends reports to Davis, about the progress of the killings. 

Davis himself boasts of spreading slavery - by force of arms -- into the North.  See below, documents from his OWN papers.

Southern War Ultimatums- - issued in 1856, then again 1861 -- were about one thing - the spread of slavery.  Five out of five of the war ultimatums, boasted about in Richmond papers in 1861, were about the spread of slavery into states that were already free states.

And it's not just the speeches and documents boasting of killing to spread slavery, or justifying killing to spread slavery.  More than anything, it's the actual killing and torturing to spread slavery.

And not some nuts -- not a few drunks at the far end of a bar, blubbering. These are the very top leaders -- Davis, Atchison, Toombs, Stephens, the Davis cabinet, the Richmond newspapers. 

They were not coy, or timid. They boasted of killing. They were not parsing words at this time. They were killing and terrorizing.  


If you think "history teachers"  know this -- they do not.    How could they know -- it's not in college text books either, in any clear way.

Oh -- text books do mention, in a watered down way, the "troubles".   But no text book shows in any candid way, what Southern leaders did, or bragged about at the time.


As Lincoln and many others said -- always always used violence. Specifically, and the huge current issue of Lincoln's life- - Southern leaders killing sprees in Kansas, and how they used Kansas Act to set up the killing sprees there.

 But most history teachers could not find Lincoln's letters about the violent nature of Southern leaders, the killing sprees in Kansas, if their life depended on it.

Nor do history teachers know that Lincoln went to Kansas -- after the Southern leaders made it illegal, a crime punishable by torture - to speak against slavery, and there Lincoln spoke against slavery.

See --you only know what you are told.  I get my information from primarily SOUTHERN leaders themselves. Southern books, Southern speeches, Southern documents, Southern newspapers, at the time. 


Every US text book should have Atchison's speech, Davis's boasting of invading the North in installing slavery there, and a dozen other documents.   But they don't.

Tell your "history teacher"  that Jeff Davis boasted of spreading slavery North, and they will look at you like you are out of your mind.

But Southern leaders -- Davis, Atchison, Stephens, Toombs, Stringfellow - were themselves violent men or apologist for violence. 

We will continue to lynch, and hang, tar and feather and drown, every white-livered abolitionist who dares pollute out soil.

In fact, Atchison and Stringfellow created a "bogus legislature"   as it's now euphamistically called, which actually not only made it illegal to tell a black person there were free by the law at the time-- but made the death penalty for doing such things.

They also made it illegal to publish anything against slavery.

Atchison and Stringfellows raids into Lawrence, for example, were to enforce the laws against publishing an anti slavery newspaper.

See Atchison's full speech here TEXT VERSION


Atchison also promised to keep killing until slavery was spread into all the West. This obsession to spread slavery was the obsession of only a few men -- Davis chief among them.   But Davis and Atchison were able to hire enough other men, and get Stephen A Douglas to push through Kansas Act, to very nearly push slavery into the rest of the US.

Slavery -  dressed up today by dumbasses as "not that bad"  was based entirely on violence.  Try to escape, we will torture you. Fight back using force, we will burn you to death, hang you, and likely torture you in front of the other slaves, first.

Yet you have history teachers telling students that slaves "were part of the family"  and that the owners of the slaves "worked in the field with the slaves, side by side".

As George Mason said of men like Lee and Davis, born in an age where entire races of other men were seen as inferior beings, created men who were "of poisoned mind" -- in today's jargon, sociopaths and psychopaths.

They might dress up in fluffy blouses at times, but they were as vile as any men in history, was Mason's point.

Maybe he knew?

You probably never heard what Southern leaders boasted of -- loud and proud, repeatedly, in context, until they lost.

But the ISIS like boasting of killing, the threats, the beatings, the drownings --all that is taught to day, if at all, as if it were a few nuts and not typical of Southern leaders way of operating.

For example, Atchison and others killings, tortures, promises for endless killings -- etc etc -- is taught in the bullshit " Trouble in Kansas" crap.   And most teachers not only don't know that Atchison passed Kansas Act, then raced out to Kansas to terrorize, and was paid by Jeff Davis to do so, officially, they don't want to know.

They tell their students such shit as "Oh, there was plenty of blame to go around out there".   Idiots.  They need to learn what the fuck  happened -- who killed who, and why.  And what they boasted of.


and many others....

 We will tell you about the Senator, and how he worked officially for Jefferson Davis, reported progress of his killing sprees to Davis, and damn near got Kansas as a slave state, by violence,  never mind that 95% of white citizens in Kansas rejected slavery.

David Rice Atchison came as close as humanly possible to terrorizing and killing enough white citizens of Kansas, and making them a "slave state"  even though 95% of white citizens in Kansas rejected slavery already, and would eventually defeat Atchison and his men, and be admitted as a free state, before Lincoln took office.


States Rights?  You may have heard -- Southern leaders cared about state's rights!

Uh - not so much.   Not for slavery, as Jefferson Davis himself explained.   The people of Kansas, the legislature of Kansas, the Congress of the US, could not keep slavery out of Kansas.  That's what Davis wrote himself.  See below. 

Even after --that's right after -- Kansas voted 95% against slavery, and even after Kansas became a free state, Davis himself demanded the spread of slavery into Kansas -- specifically Kansas.

In fact, the Five Southern War Ultimatums, issued after -- that's right after"  Kansas became a free state by overwhelming vote, were all about one thing -- the SPREAD of slavery.

Not one word in Southern Ultimatums about "tariffs".   Not one word about "states rights".   Not one word about taxes.

But a lot of words about spread of slavery into KANSAS.

So no, there were no state's rights, per Southern leaders, after Dred Scott decision. 

Southern leaders hatred of state's rights to reject slavery. 

You never heard this, till now.

The South was proud as hell about it, then. 

David Rice Atchison's amazing speech should be in every US text book, and on the door of every US history teacher.  It's that basic.

Atchison's speech is more important than any speech made by Lincoln --  because in his speech, Atchison makes it clear, loud, and proud, they are killing to spread slavery, and they will continue to kill, until slavery is spread (and spread against states rights)  into Kansas and all of the West.

No.  You don't know.   But guess who did know about Southern leaders boasting of war, killing and torturing, and passing the Kansas Act to force slavery to all of the US?  

David Rice Atchison knew -- so did Jefferson Davis,.  Senator Atchison, the business and political partner of Stephen A Douglas, and childhood friend of Jefferson Davis, was working officially for Jeff Davis at the time.


In their own publications.   Not "gotcha" speeches, but repeated, in context boasting of killing to spread slavery, and boasting of killing to stop folks from even speaking against slavery.

Let me repeat that -- boasting of killing to spread slavery.  Not by a few nuts, but by Southern leaders, including the US Senator who got Kansas Act passed. 

Not sorta, not kinda, not "in a fucking way".   

And it was common knowledge, then. In fact, Southern leaders boasted of it -- justified the killing and torturing, even boasted of it,  all justified by the bible and by the Dred Scott decision.


This is from Jeff Davis own book.  He wrote it.  He was very clear, Dred Scott changed everything -- because the Dred Scott decision ordered the federal government to protect slavery, even in areas that rejected slavery.


Davis was correct, the Dred Scott decision did in fact order that the federal government protect, yes protect slavery, and did in the same sentence, order, yes order, that blacks can not be seen as human beings (as people) but must be seen as property.



A few "little words" in the  Dred Scott decision.

Those "few words" are exactly the words Davis himself spoke of, and wrote about, claiming correctly they made all the difference.

Davis -- and the South -- based their justification for killing on these words.   Dred Scott did indeed, as Davis claimed, order the federal government to see blacks not as persons but as property only.

Jeff Davis -- in his own damn book -- made it clear, Dred Scott decision changed everything.  This is a screen capture from Jeff Davis own book.  Please -- no more idiots email me, to say Jeff Davis never said this.  He wrote it, in his own damn book.

Blacks are not "people".

Not people.

And on that basis -- as Davis  himself said -- no citizen, no legislature, no Congress -- no one - could keep slavery out.

Kansas citizens voted repeatedly -- overwhelmingly -- to keep slavery out. That did not matter according to Southern leaders -- see why below.

Congress had precluded slavery in that territory, and granted Kansas state hood as a free state.  Even that did not matter, according to Jefferson Davis, who actually issued War Ultimatums after (remember, after) Kansas voted against slavery 95%, and after (remember after) Kansas became a free state.

Shame on history text books not showing these very basic facts.  Nothing could be more basic than this, leading to US Civil War.

Southern leaders actually hired and  sent killers to Kansas- - because Kansas citizens voted against slavery. Not sorta, not kinda, not in a way.  That is what they did, as you see Atchison boasted of it. And that was why they did it. 

Davis sent tchison to KS - and as Atchison boasted of -- he was not in Kansas to talk.  He was not there to convince people to accept slavery.  In fact, his ads in newspapers to hire the killers made it clear -- "THE TIME TO TALK IS OVER".

Atchison  was there to kill and silence opposition to slavery.  And to spread slavery all the way to the Pacific. 

Why not report, what Atchison boasted of did?  And keep in mind, Atchison was not some nut, he was the highest ranking pro-slavery person in the US Senate. He personally caused Kansas Act to pass, and yes, he boasted about that, too.

This is from their own newspaper in Kansas.  Let me repeat that, Atchison and Stringfellow had their own newspaper in Kansas,  and it was illegal to publish anti-slavery papers.

Here is what Atchison's OWN newspapers said at the time.  They will continue to hang and torture anyone they found in Kansas against slavery.  They tried to force men to sign a pledge promising to be pro-slavery.  If you did not sign, you were tortured and told to leave the territory.

If you came back, they killed you.  

Why not report what Davis boasted of and did?

That is how Jeff Davis and all of the South justified sending the killers to KS, in 1856, even though the Dred Scott decision did not come out till 1857, a little time like that never stopped Davis.  He justified sending Atchison to Kansas, by the Dred Scott decision, never mind that no one heard of the Dred Scott decision at the time, it was not even made yet.

To Davis mind -- and his actions everything Atchison did was "constitutionally required"   because of DRED SCOTT order that blacks are not human beings, and slavery must be protected.  Kansas or not, people's votes against slavery or not,  that all did not matter, once Dred Scott ruled.

Protecting slavery meant shutting down any opposition to slavery, no newspapers, no public speeches against slavery -- it was even against the law set by Atchison with Davis help, to speak to free blacks and tell them they are free. 

The violence  Southern leaders did BOASTFULLY.  They not only killed and terrorized to spread slavery, the boasted of it, out the ass boasting, until they lost.

Oh you heard of this-- in Orwellian double speak, in watered down nonsense, acceptable to Southern crybabies, as "TROUBLE IN KANSAS",  As if trouble just fell from the sky.

Trouble was paid for -- Davis paid the killers Atchison hired.  Trouble was organized -- Davis sent Atchison officially to Kansas as "General of Law And Order".   Trouble was calculated -- Atchison and his men were killing before Dred Scott decision was even decided.

Davis just had no problem retrofitting his justification for the killing sprees in KS, by men hired from Texas and South Carolina, because he had to justify it somehow.  And that worked for him. 

Find out what Lincoln actually faced -- not the watered down shit approved by Southern liars and cowards on Southern school boards.


Think the US Civil War started in 1861? 

Not really, because Southern leaders had already declared war, already bragged about killing and torturing, and already sent paid killers to spread slavery into Kansas and beyond.

They -- the Southern leaders -- boasted it was war.  They killed and tortured, and boasted about that, too.  They also demanded the spread of slavery into states that were already free states -- yes, they did. 

1861 was when the USA started to fight back against these fuckers -- including Jefferson Davis, US Senator David Rice Atchison, and Vice President Robert Toombs.

Any history teacher, any book, any lecture,  any movie, any documentary that implies the US Civil War started in 1861 is nearly worthless, including the otherwise fine work by Ken Burns, in "Civil War" film.



The Southern leaders who were killing, and boasting of killing, should know what they were doing. They were not shy, not timid,  not cute about it. There were killing "for the entire south"  and they would keep killing until slavery was spread all the way to the Pacific, into states that were already free states.

Jeff Davis did that even better, saying he looked forward to the day when, by "force of arms"  he could spread slavery to all the North, and said so in emphatic terms.  He made the declaration, he said "so there will be no confusion in the future".

Slavery must be spread -- and they were killing to spread it.  And they boasted of it.  

This was widely known at the time, but whitewashed by Southern cry babies and liars who succesfully prevented US text books from telling you the ISIS like insanity of Southern leaders, their tortures, their killings, and their boasting of both.  Their promises of endless killing and tortures, their hatred of state's rights.

Just part of his amazing speech.... 

see full speech below.

The biggest con job in US text book history, is how SOuthern crybabies kept the ISIS like killings, tortures, and war ultimatums, out of our text books, since US text books began.

Like Lee's torture of slave girls. 


Did you know that Southern leaders were already at war -- and called it a war to spread slavery -- 1854 on?   Oh, no one told you?

They did not admit they started killing, and were already  at war to spread slavery "for the entire South,"  they bragged out the ass about it. 

And not some nut -- the top US Senator boasted of it. Bragged about it.  The Senator was David Rice Atchison.

Atchison worked for- - was paid by -- Jefferson Davis, then Secretary of War.  Atchison took out ads in Texas and South Carolina newspapers, shown below, to hire men to kill. He admitted that's what they were going to do, kill.



Atchison burned his papers, during the civil war, when it became clear the South would lose.   But a few remained elsewhere, like on of his reports to his boss, Jefferson Davis.

Here, he boasts of the progress of killings, and predicts a quick success in Kansas.   Remember, Atchison is the guy who got Kansas Act passed. A US Senator, who pushes Kansas Act through (supposedly to "give people the right to vote")  then rushes to Kansas and starts killing and terrorizing, to STOP not just voting against slavery, but to stop anyone from speaking or writing against slavery.

Atchison demanded the spread of slavery into the area in red. It's important to understand, the same violence and subterfuge, like the war against Mexico, was how slavery territory and states spread to begin with. Slavery was always -- always -- spread by violence.   Those who spoke, preached, or wrote against slavery were punished, including torture, and killed or pushed out of the area.
Unless you know that, you don't know US history.  Most stupid "history" teachers assume whites were allowed to vote and speak against slavery. Oh fuck no.  Slavery did not last where it could be preached against, spoken against, and voted against.   The South learned that, and from 1820's on, enacted laws against speech, including religious speech, that was anti slavery. Very basic, and you never hear of that in US text books.

Very basic. Atchison demanded the spread of slavery into the area in red, even though California, Oregon, were free states, and Kansas was a free territory.,  Atchison was loud and proud, we will continue to kill and torture to spread slavery to that entire area.

It's time your idiot "history teacher"  knew these basics.

The area in white was the land slave power had ALREADY used violence and killing to push slavery there.

If you think slave power EVER, EVER, EVER allowed a vote on slavery you don't know history.

Atchison, in fact, rushed to Kansas to PREVENT a vote on slavery, as you will see. 

The "crybaby" South has never allowed anything like this -- which Southern leaders boasted of at the time -- into text books.  This was common knowledge at the time.  Southern leaders boasted of things then, you never heard anything about now. 

Atchison's speech to his Texas men, just before their invasion of Lawrence Kansas, is below.  He made it clear to them, they were at war, and made them promise to kill.

 Senator David Atchison, the day after he got Kansas Act passed, personally went to Kansas, and there started his violent efforts to kill enough people in Kansas so that, as he himself said, slavery would spread not just into Kansas, but in the rest of the US -- all the way to the Pacific Ocean.

His speech should be in every US text book 

Lincoln got back into politics BECAUSE of David Rice Atchison.

And your stupid "history" teacher does not know, though if they read this, they will pretend they did know.  That's how  history teachers are.


WHY?   Why did Atchison get Kansas Act passed, then go to Kansas and start  his killing sprees?

Why hire Texas killers to come to Kansas?

Because Kansas citizens were against slavery. And 90% of them would vote against slavery.  Atchison tried very hard to kill enough people -- and he said so -- that not only would Kansas citizens not vote against slavery, they would not even speak badly about slavery in newspapers.


SHORT VERSION..   When Kansas rejected slavery in early 1850's, Southern leaders lost their Goddamned minds. The untold story of Southern leaders bragging about killing to spread slavery, 1856 on.


Long before Lincoln was famous -- five years before the US Civil War - Southern leaders already issued War Ultimatums.

They did not just talk. They killed. They tortured. And they bragged they were killing. They bragged they were torturing.  

Not a few nut jobs. The TOP Southern leader in the US Senate, at the time, was David Rice Atchison, of Missouri.  A business partner of Stephen A Douglas,  he got Kansas Act passed, then went to Kansas immediately, went to Kansas and started his violent assault on the citizens of Kansas.


The South would issue War Ultimatums later, too, that the state of Kansas, by then a STATE, must accept and respect slavery.

That's below, too.  But Atchison issued more amazing War Ultimatums in 1856,  by then he was Jeff Davis's official "General of Law and Order" in Kansas.

Remember that, because your "history teacher" sure as hell does not know that a US Senator, who got Kansas Act passed, then immediately went to Kansas, worked for Jeff Davis,  and hired over 1000 men to invade and try to control, Kansas.

None of this is in dispute. Atchison not only boasted of it, but his fellow Senator, Charles Sumner, spoke about it for two days straight, on the floor of the Senate.   That is the speech after which Charles Sumner was beaten, almost to death.

The beating of Charles Sumner was such a big deal, even your history teacher heard about it, and will insist he or she knows all about it.  As usual, ask them a question, and you see, they know very very little.  

The question you should ask -- "What was Charles Sumner speaking about, when he was beaten nearly to death on the Senate floor".

The answer is -- Sumner was speaking about David Rice Atchison and his paid killers in Kansas, detailing what they did, in detail, after detail, after detail.

Charles Sumner was beaten for speaking -- at length, in detail -- about Davis Rice Atchison and his killing sprees.  But those spreed got much much worse, after Atchison was beaten. Atchison led the group of paid killers (paid by Jeff Davis) into Kansas, a few days after Sumner was beaten.  

Sumner was detailing the killings BEFORE the men arrived that Davis paid for.  Remember that.



The Ultimatums?  Spread slavery against the will of the people not just in Kansas, but all the way to the Pacific Ocean, including California and Oregon, already free states.  Later, Jeff Davis, in his own clever lanaguage, would substantiate this, writing in his own book that the resistance to the spread of slavery into Kansas was "the intolerable grievance".

Remember-- Kansas voted 90% against slavery, and became a free state, and even then South issued war ultimatums that Kansas must accept and protect slavery.  EVEN AFTER Kansas became a free state, they made these WAR UTLTIMATUMS.

Still buy this shit about South caring about states rights?  FUCK NO.  That was never true. It was a slogan some ass wipes used, and got repeated. Got repeated by idiots so often, it's become a perpetual myth.  Southern leaders cared about spreading slavery and power.  


FROM 1820

That's right. Southern LEADERS issued War Ultimatums not just in 1861, but from 1854.

We teach the euphemisms of "Compromise of 1820" and the "Compromise" of 1850.   Fucking bullshit. As Lincoln said -- what compromise?    Every time, every single time, Southern leaders used violence to spread slavery, then used violence to sustain slavery, then demanded the spread of slavery again.

And again.

The difference in 1860?   Everyone knew  Kansas and California and Oregon were already free states,   But now, Southern leaders demanded the spread of slavery into Kansas.  And their leaders, like Atchison, like Davis, were boasting of spreading slavery North and South.

You never heard that, did you?  Never heard of Davis boasting of spreading slavery "by force of arms" into the North, as well as the West. REmember, slavery never spread anywhere by peaceful means.   And Kansas -- Southern efforts to kill enough in Kansas to push slavery there -- was the blue print they always used.

And you never heard of ANY Southern War ULtimatum, though Southern leaders were quite fucking proud of them, at the time.

See the speech by Senator Atchison in it's entirety, below. 


But it was much more than speech. This was the attitude, laid bare. This was to his hired men, not a group of children. Not a white washed bit of double talk.  

Atchison did Jeff Davis bidding in Kansas, with his full official support.  Atchison bragged about that, too.

That Atchison  passed Kansas Act was not in dispute -- he boasted of it. That he immediately went to KS and started his killing and terrorizing -- also  not in dispute, because he boasted of it.

That Atchison worked officially for Jefferson Davis, was paid by Jefferson Davis, and his 1000 Texas men also paid by Jefferson Davis, in 1854, is also not in dispute.

Davis confirmed Atchison was doing the will of the South, and claimed his actions were "Constitutionally Required.

The third invasion of Lawrence Kansas - all three invasions done by order of David Rice Atchison.

Atchison was the leader of the first two -- he openly advertised in newspapers for them, told them it was about killing, told them to be ready to kill.

Atchison brags he hates the US flag -- and only rides under the rebel flag, that is red in color, he explained, for the blood they will spill, to spread slavery.

He was paid by -- and his men were paid by -- Jefferson Davis.  


Atchison's  words and actions got all the stars in the sky moving, re Civil War.

If there was one particular person who   got Civil War going, in was David Rice Atchison.

He got Kansas Act passed.  He went personally to Kansas and started killing and terrorizing there. His men killed John Brown's son.   His supporters in Congress beat US Senator Charles Sumner on Senate floor 

Atchison got John Brown moving. John Brown was the first guy to push back against the thugs -- and was hung for his trouble. 

Atchison pulled Lincoln back into politics.

Atchison was Jeff Davis "tough guy" who did not just stay in Washington, but actually went places, actually hired killers, actually put the thugs together to do the dirty work.

Maybe more than anything, Atchison got Jeff Davis excited about killing to spread slavery. Davis already had talkers and bullshiters, but Atchison was a drunk, a thug, a bully, who would DO the deeds, or at least, hire men and be on the ground when the kilings and terrorizing started.

BTW The Dred Scott decision was written -- probably by Jeff Davis -- in order to justify Atchison's killing sprees and acts of terror.  Before Dred Scott, Atchison was just a thug killing people.  Jeff Davis claimed Dred Scott decision justified everything that happened in Kansas -- meaning, Atchison's killing sprees and terrorizing.


Atchison also brags he will continue killing until slavery is spread to the Pacific Ocean.

He wasn't  kidding.   He bragged he started the war -- he called it war -- to spread slavery in 1856.  Then he did exactly that.

  He worked officially for Jefferson Davis.

   HE was not some nut on his own. 

Atchison was officially Jeff Davis's "General of Law and Order in Kansas".    He was also Stephen A Douglas business partner.  Atchison, according to many sources at the time, forced Douglas to push Kansas Act through Congress, under a threat of taking away Douglas's very powerful position as Chairman of House and Senate Committee on Kansas. 


Shame on every "history teacher" who does not know this. You can not get more basic than this.

Lincoln got back into politics BECAUSE of Atchison.

John Brown went to Kansas BECAUSE of Atchison.

Jeff Davis sent 1000 men to Kansas BECAUSE of Atchison.

Kansas Act got passed, BECAUSE of Atchison.

Southern War Ultimatums came directly from ATCHISON's Actions.

Dred Scott decision came about to justify what Atchison was already doing in Kansas.




Full speech below.


Atchison's speech should be in every history text book, in the United States.  It is as important as Lincoln's House divided speech, in fact, Lincoln gave the House Divided Speech BECAUSE OF David Rice Atchison.

The confederate flag -- Atchison boasted to his Texas men in 1856 -- was red in color because of the blood they would spill to spread slavery.  

Who killed who -- and why -- is real history.  Everything else is bullshit.   Nothing proves this more than the US Civil War.

Get who killed who, and why, right first. Then add all the bullshit you want.   What "historians" have done re US Civil War, is first add the bullshit, and never did get to the basics -- first or later -- of who killed who, and why.


Next time someone claims  the Confederate flag had  nothing to do with slavery, s
how Senator David Rice Atchison speech, he bragged out the ass it was red for the blood they would spill to spread slavery. 

That's the first mention of the "Southern flag"  - by the way.   Atchison was officially paid by Jeff Davis, as Secretary of War.

Jefferson Davis officially supported him, and said so. 





No one was surprised Atchison was in Kansas, nor that he was killing to spread slavery, and working for Jeff Davis.

Newspapers, North and South, reported it.

Atchison got Kansas Act passed -- he boasted of that, and other Senators said yes, Atchison was the guy who actually got Kansas Act passed, with his friend and business partner, Stephen A Douglas. (Douglas claimed  he wrote it all, Atchison bragged he made sure Douglas put in specific language).

Those who knew Atchison, at the time, said Atchison was up to exactly this -- he passed Kansas Act, so that his violence in Kansas would have meaning. Before Kansas Act, slavery was restricted to certain geographic lines.  Kanas was outside those lines.


Atchison's bragging made it clear -- he was going to spread slavery not just into Kansas Territory, but all the way to the Pacific -- the land outlighted in red, above.

First, Atchison said we MUST get Kansas territory.  Then, we will get the rest, all the way to Pacific Ocean.



This was not news to anyone alive -- and paying attention  -- in the 1850s.  

Nor should it be news to your history teacher.  It does not get any more basic,

No one talked about anything more -- virtually every newspaper, North and South, every speech, every vote, on any office, was about spread of slavery, one way or another. 

To say it was the center of national attention and focus, is a gross understatement.  The justification -- the killings, the war ultimatums,  Kansas Act fraud, the whole thing, engulfed every election, every newspaper, ever day.

Southern newspapers of course cheered it, claiming they had "every right" to expand slavery, even against the will of the people in Kansas.    They dropped that "state's rights"  excuse when Kansas rejected slavery, something your "history teacher" is clueless about.

You might be surprised the spread of slavery, including Atchison's killing sprees and the War Ultimatums/ Kansas Act/ Dred Scott decision were the biggest news of 1853 to 1861.  That's not your fault.

It's your teachers fault.


We all heard in school about of the "compromises of 1820 and 1850.  But as 

Compromise my ass.   What you did not hear, is that there was no compromise.  About as much compromise as a robbery at a 7-11.

Lincoln once said -- what compromises? 

Bet you are never told that -- not ever. Not told about Southern War Ultimatums, not told that "COMPROMISES"  was a euphemism for "WE DOUBLE SLAVERY TERRITORY OR WE SHOOT YOUR ASS.

Southern leaders- - BY VIOLENCE -- had killed enough to spread slavery  in all of the South, all the way to Pacific, under a certain line.

But now -- after they got all that "compromises"  they wanted even more.  

No one told you that. 

Southern leaders demanded spread of slavery again, and again and again. No one dared fight them for it. Slavery was "down South"  and then all along the South, but who wanted to face these guys? 

As Lincoln pointed out in 1846 -- slave power had created a war against Mexico, to double the size of slave territory. 

In 1854 -- they demanded the spread of slavery into Kansas and the entire west (YES  the entire west, as you will see).


Southern war ultimatums -- Kansas Act and Dred Scott -- was the South's stupid and violent "all in" move.   Lincoln pointed this out, in his House Divided Speech.  He was not kidding.

Now, slavery was not going to be just "down South".   Now, by the perverse logic of Dred Scott, and the crap from Kansas Act, slavery could not be stopped.

Slavery was now a terminal, metastasizing cancer.  It had to go, or the USA would go. One or the other.
Did anyone ever explain that to you? Lincoln did, in his own gentle way, in House Divided.

And this time - the people of Kansas were against slavery.   Because of the telegraph, no one was fooled by Southern bullshit.  Killings, tortures, terrorizing -if it happened on Friday, by Monday folks in New York, Chicago, Springfield, St. Louis knew it.

And no longer could the very bold and brutal slave power folks control the communication.  This is a woefully underlooked aspect of US history -- how information about killings to spread slavery, became common knowledge, because of the telegraph.

 Anyway,  no one there was surprised by Southern War Ultimatums

 So no one was surprised when Southern War Ultimatums, of 1861, were specific and proud -- Kansas MUST accept and respect slavery, never mind the white male voters there rejected it, and KS citizens fought back against Atchison and his Texas men.

The South had spread slavery into the area bordered by white, by "virtue: of violence already -- namely war against Mexico, where US slave owners pushed for war to  double size of slavery.  The fact you have never seen a map that shows what Atchison demanded, is a reflection of how meekly your history books show what SOuthern leaders were bragging about, at the time.

Atchison demanded the spread of slavery into the area in RED border.   Try to grasp that.  You can not understand Lincoln, or the Civil War, unless you know what Southern leaders demanded, who they killed, and what they boasted of.

ALmost none of that is shown is US text books, in a candid way.

Yeah, I know -- your history teacher didn't tell you.  Your history teachers doesn't know much, unless he knows about who killed who, and why.

Because of the explosion in availability of Southern speeches, Southern documents, Southern books,  we now know more than the bullshitters could or bothered to know before.

David Rice Atchison's speeches, reports to Jeff Davis, and his role in passing Kansas Nebraska Act, is just the tip of the iceberg.


Lincoln was well aware what Atchison was doing, and what the killings in Kansas meant.  Read his letter to Speed, which I will post soon.

It was no secret.  Stephen A Douglas, Atchison's  business partner, and the other Senator that got Kansas Act passed  was hung in effigy,for his initial support of Atchison.  Douglas quickly flipped on Atchison, at least in public. 

Behind the scenes, and in clever double speak, Douglas supported Atchison, by actively preventing Kansas citizens from getting their all important paperwork to Congress and the President, so Kansas could become a free state,


Because Kansas citizens did not let Atchison's terror work -- they continue to publish anti slavery newspapers, and continued process to become a free state by a 95% vote -- Southern leaders came up with Plan B.

Dred Scott. As Lincoln pointed out -- and Jefferson Davis boasted of -- because of Dred Scott decision, there was no way to stop slavery in Kansas, no matter what the people there said, voted, and no  matter how the fought back against Atchison. In fact, Douglas and Jefferson Davis supported Atchisons actions.   Douglas doing a political balancing act.

Atchison should know -- He was one of the leaders doing it. ANd he bragged, as Davis would later brag, how forcing slavery into Kansas by Kansas Act and Dred Scott gave all power to slave owners.  They and they alone would decide where slavery went,

Atchison knew what he was doing, when he passed Kansas Act, because he quickly left DC and rushed to KS to begin his violence there.

Atchison was refreshing, in a way -- he would give the most amazing speeches, to anyone that would listen.   Most Southern leaders spoke in double speak or euphamism -- not Atchison,

Kansas killing and terrorizing, and bragging about it.   So what if Bruce Catton claims abolitionists cause the Civil War. Seriously, Catton was dumb about David Rice Atchison, and Jeff Davis machinations and killing sprees, in Kansas.

Yeah, yeah, we all heard that booooshit about Southern leaders "deep concern" for state's rights.

Uh -- not so much. They got rid of the "state's rights" excuse, when Kansas white males dared to vote against slavery, and speak against slavery.

See Atchison's full speech below.

It was common knowledge then.  Did you know who Charles Sumner was talking about - by name -- for hours, on Senate floor, when he was beaten almost to death?

He was talking about David Rice Atchison.




Atchison  boasted he would kill, exterminate, hang, to spread slavery not just into Kansas, and beyond.   

He worked for -- and officially for -- Jefferson Davis.  What the fuck was the "Secretary of War" (Davis was Secretary of War then)  doing sending US Senators to Kansas to kill and lead killers into Kansas to spread slavery?

Not kinda, not sorta, not in a way. And Atchison boasted it was war

"It will soon be over"

Atchison boasted to his men that Kansas citizens were cowards -- a quick show of force, against heavily armed men, led by Atchison,  who would kill a few folks, torture a few others, terrorize a few more, the Kansas citizens will wilt away.

At first, Atchison was right, Kansas citizens ran from the thugs Atchison hired.     But they started to fight back.     Atchison wrote his boss, Jefferson Davis,  that he had everything under control, it would soon be over.

Uh -- not so much. 


Remember -- this was the US Senator that got Kansas Act passed,

This is the guy that made Lincoln get back into politics.

This is the guy Sumner was talking about for HOURS.

Shame on every "historian"  including Bruce Catton, McPherson, and every other stupid bastard for not mentioning this guy -- at least in a clear way.

Everyone knew who Atchison was then --  Lincoln got back into politics because of Atchison and Stephen Douglas passing Kansas Act.

Remember, Charles Sumner's speech was ABOUT Davis Rice Atchison.   Atchison is the guy that got Kansas act passed, and bragged he got it passed.

Almost no one knows who he was, now.

No one ever gave such a candid, powerful and proud explaination of what Southern leaders demanded.

To show you how "historians" have missed David Rice Atchison, go ask your history teacher, any college history teacher, whatever.   Ask if they know about Senator Charles Sumner's speech --- the one he was beaten for.

Of course, of course, we know that very well, they will say, smug as  hell.

Ask them who Sumner was talking about - by name, as the guy who passed Kansas Act, then went to KS to kill, torture, and terrorize, to stop free speech, and stop folks from voting, or even speaking, against slavery.

Sumner also made it clear-- to the Senators listening to his speech -- that Atchison was doing the bidding of Jefferson Davis, with the help of Stephen A Douglas.

Events and documents proved Sumner correct.



Atchison made it clear, in his own speech, what everyone knew already.  He was there "for the entire South"   and for "Southern rights" to have slavery all the way to the Pacific Ocean, state's rights or no.

And -- Atchison himself called it war.  He was proud of that. In effect, South had a five year head start, in the Civil War,  at least in Kansas. 

In fact, if you read his full speech, Atchison boasted the flag he rode under was red -- red for the blood he would spill to spread slavery.  And the words on the flag?  "SOUTHERN RIGHTS".

What was he talking about?  He was talking about their "right" to force slavery into Kansas, and beyond.

And he wasn't fucking kidding. 

According to Jeff Davis, the Confederate leaders, and David Rice Atchison, states rights did NOT apply to Kansas, even after Kansas became a state.  Did you know that?

Davis had a certain "logic" -- see his logic below, re Dred Scott case. 




Kind of a big deal -- and you never heard of those, either.

Headlines in Richmond paper -- "THE TRUE ISSUE"   -- was the spread of slavery into Kansas.

Exactly what Atchison had been doing and saying for years already, so no one was surprised.  Do you know Southern War Ultimatums of 1861?

That may shock you now, but it shocked  no one then.  This is what was going on for five years, already. 

The Confederate Constitution, in effect, directed the same thing - salvery SHALL go into the territories. (Kansas was already a state by then, but the Confederacy  did not recognize Kansas state hood). 

New York papers actually reprinted the Five ULtimatums -- and suggested Lincoln obey them.


Atchison played "boldly" -- meaning bloody.  He first hired Missouri men, then when there werent enough Missouri men,  he hired from Texas and South Carolina. 

If he could have hired more men, he might have got the job done.  

Davis also appointed the governor of Kansas Territory, and the marshals.  He had help from Stephen A Douglas, who was Chairman of House and Senate Committe on Kansas, all the time Atchison was in Kansas.


See his full speech below...

Atchison was not just some drunk -  he was  the US Senator that got Kansas Act passed (see below). He works officially for Jefferson Davis as "General of Law and Order of Kansas Territories"   He reported to Jeff Davis. 

Who killed who -- and why -- is real history. Everything else is bullshit   

Robert Toombs brought crowds to their feet screaming that stopping the spread of slavery would doom the white race. Another speech no US text books shows.  That's right, if we can not spread slavery, the white race will be exterminated.   The governor of Florida said the white race was doom to "burn slowly to death" just cause Lincoln was against the spread of slavery. 

 The governor of Georgia wrote an open letter to the public, saying that they could never free the slaves -- or they would all be reduced to the level of the Negro, and Negroes would "be with" white women.  We would have to kill our slaves with our own hands,  rather than let that happen.


Atchison was clear -- in this and other speeches,  he would kill to spread slavery in Kansas, regardless that the overwhelming % of white males in Kansas did not want slavery.  

Most "history teachers" assume there were many people in Kansas who wanted slavery. Nonsense -- almost all the men who worked for Atchison (yes, he paid them) were from Missouri. If there were any local men in Kansas that wanted to spread slavery by force, apart from Atchison's men, I don't know who  they are. Some folks probably wanted slavery, but no one on the record was for killing to spread slavery there, and using terror to get that done, other than Atchison and his paid men.

When Kansas voters got to vote in honest elections -- when  Atchison's men were not in charge -- they voted 90 and 95% against slavery. It was not even close. Yet people assume that Kansas had a lot of "organic" -- local -- support for slavery. No, that's not true. 

Atchison reported to Jeff Davis -- Atchison was officially Jeff Davis's "General of Law and Order of Kansas Territories". Atchison  got that position with the tactic approval of Stephen A Douglas, the Chairman of House and Senate Committee on Kansas.


Atchison, Douglas, and Jeff Davis were the three men most people in Kansas blamed for what happened.   Douglas denied it, but events and Douglas comments later in life, confirm it was so*.

Atchison in fact, bragged he worked for Jeff Davis, and bragged the men would be paid by "the present authorities,"  plus they could have all they stole from the houses they would attack!   Really -- read Atchison's speech.

See this-- from Atchison's letter to Jeff Davis. Atchison destroyed all his papers during the Civil War, but this letter survived....


Stephen A Douglas, was Chairman of House and Senate Committee on Kansas. Nothing -- literally nothing -- got to Congress about Kansas, unless Douglas, as Chairman, allowed it.  

As Sumner, Lincoln, and the entire Republican leadership knew, Douglas personally kept documents from Kansas from reaching the the President and Congress, until Atchison could get his "legislature" set up, and send in his documents to make Kansas a slave state.


The outcry against Douglas  for his support of Atchison was stunning -- and Douglas had to flip flop.

At first  Douglas was for "Lecompton" Constitution,  and spoke of the wisdom of going ahead with it now, they can change it later, if they want to.  Most "scholars" about this period are unware of that fact,

The popular outcry was nothing like anyone had seen, at least that's what some folks wrote about it newspapers at the time. Were they hyping it?  We don't know. 

It was said Douglas, riding in a train from Boston to Chicago could read a newspaper by the lights of people hanging him in effigy, during the night, and the noise from people screaming at his train about his support of Atchison's tricks, would keep him awake during the day.

By the time Douglas reached Chicago, he had decided his public help for Atchison had to stop - though behind the scenes, Douglas did nothing to expose or stop Atchison, his partner in politics, and business.  They both got Kansas Nebraska passed.

Douglas would save his political career, by denoucing the Lecompton Constitution -- never mind that his machinations and support of Atchison, had brought it about in the first place.  Douglas had to keep his seat in Senate, period.



While publically pretending to be for popular soverieghnty, actually kept in language in Kansas Act that prevented it -- the very language proslavery folks in Kansas used, to deny people's right to reject slavery there.

People at the time, including Douglas long time friend John Palmer, knew exactly how vile Douglas action's were, in helping Atchison and Jeff Davis.

Douglas helped Atchison and Davis, because he wanted, and needed, Southern support to become President.  Douglas did not mean for people in Kansas to be killed, for the Civil War to follow. He flipped from being resolute for the Missouri Compromise, to bat-shit-crazy for Kansas Nebraska Act,  essentially overnight.

One day Douglas was lambasting anyone who dared question the "sacred pact" of Missouri Compromise, and the next day, Douglas was shouting in even more fervor, for the Kansas Nebraska Act he and Atchison got through Congress.

Those who knew Douglas well, knew exactly what he was  up to. Charles Sumner knew, and so did Lincoln.   Atchison boasted about getting Douglas help on passing Kansas Act.

Who would know better what Douglas was up to? 


When Kansas rejected slavery -- Atchison went to Kansas.  Remember that. 

No one thought the people of Kansas wanted slavery, and indeed, they did not.  The citizens there eventually voted against slavery by a stunning 90 and 95%, and were admitted to the Union under President Buchanan. 

But it was hell to make that happen. David Rice Atchison, US Senator, then General of Law and Order (a position Jeff Davis made up) did everything in his power to make Kansas a slave state. 

Unlike Davis, and others, Atchison could be  candid -- he boasted of things others would say only carefully. He was not called "Bourbon Dave"  for nothing.




Orwellian double speak existed before Orwell.

While Kansas Act said the people of Kansas would be "perfectly free"  to decide "domestic intstitutions"  on their own, the fine print in that Act  made that like "slavery is freedom"  and " up is down" kinda BS.

As Lincoln pointed out in the Lincoln Douglas debates, Douglas's "popular sovereighty"  was actually quite the opposite, in practice.

 David Rice Atchison, made it impossible to vote against slavery, in Kansas. I don't mean he made it difficult, I mean, he made it fucking impossible for five years.

Try to grasp that.    The guy who got Kansas Act passed -- personally went to Kansas and made it impossible to vote against slavery.

1200 miles-- the hard way


Atchison, after he got Kansas Act Passed,  travelled over 1200 miles, hired men from Missouri and literally invaded Kansas to create his own "legislature" in Kansas.   From the next four years, Kansas whites were not allowed to vote against slavery.

Atchison's "legislature" is now routinely called the "bogus legislature" --  which is far too nice a term.

His  "legislature"  quickly passed assorted laws, the big one, was to was to make it a crime to publically declare Kansas was a free territory. Also, no voting on slavery allowed.  Atchison said that vote was over, and he won.

Also, publishing newspapers against slavery was also outlawed.

This may sound bizare to you - outlawing newspapers?  

It was not bizarre at all. The South had such laws since the 1840's, called "anti-incendiary laws"  which made it illegal to write, or even possess, written material that could "dissatisy a slave".


If Kansas would allow folks to vote or publish newspapers against slavery, Atchison would not be doing his job -- official job.  Atchison was officially General of Law and Order in Kansas, a job created by Jefferson Davis, and apparently approved of, by Stephen A Douglas, Atchison's partner.

The slaves had no way to read  any such paper --the law was meant to stop whites from speaking opening, and writing openly, against slavery. But the excuse was, this would "dissatisfy" a slave.

Hilarious Orwellian BS.  As if they did not want a slave "dissatisfied".



When Atchison speaks to his Texas men - in the speech below -- the is talking about invading Lawrence Kansas because they broke the law -- they allowed a newspaper to continue to write against slavery, after Atchison made it illegal to do so.

No, this is not sophistry or exaggerated. This is exactly what happened.  That Atchison is boasting about it but one of many contemporary documents showing this to be the case.

If your "history" teacher tells you anything about this, they usally say some bullshit, blaming both sides.  What dumb asses.


Sumner revealed in his speech, about Atchison stopping free speech, and the other crimes, including killing and torure.  Yes, that was the speech Atchison was beaten for.

The irony of Sumner being beaten on Senate floor, for speaking about Atchison, who was stopping Free Speech in Kansas, was not lost on anyone. The South was proud of both Atchison, and the man who beat Sumner..

Of course, much of the country already knew what Atchison had done, by the time SUmner spoke of it. It was common knowledge both North and South. Southern papers bragged of  "their rights in the territories" -- even though an overwhelming percentage of citizens in Kansas, were against slavery, and fought a five year war, to eventually become officially a free state, just before Lincoln took office.


Do you know who Charles Sumner was speaking about -- for hours on end -- in the speech he was beaten almost to death for, on the Senate floor?

Don't feel bad -- your "history" teacher doesn't know either, though they will swear they read that speech.

Atchison was talking about Davis Rice Atchison, by name for hours on end.  Sumner and Atchison knew each other very well, they were in Senate together, served on committees together. 

Sumner warned the Senate and Congress NOT to pass Kansas-Nebraska Act, because it was a ruse to spread slavery  into Kansas, even though most people in Kansas did not want slavery.

Atchison's actions -- going to Kansas and doing his proud reign of terror there -- proved Sumner's warnings were exactly correct.  And Sumner reminded the listeners of that, in his speech.


Charles Sumner was beaten after exposing David Rice Atchison -- by name, hour after hour, detailing his killings, tortures, and terror in Kansas.


After that speech, Atchison's Texas men increased the violence 100 fold.

Idiotically -- really, it's dumb as hell -- history teachers  often tell their students Kansas Act was an attempt to peacfully settle the "issue of slavery in the territorties".

Actually, that "issue" was already settled in Missouri Compromise.   There could be no slavery above a certain geographic line -- Kansas was above that line.  

Really. It's CRUEL TO SLAVES to keep them out of Kansas. You can't make this shit up.  Excuses these bastards came up with, should be taught in US schools. They are not taught.

From Jefferson Davis:

Bet you never heard that -- and this is from Jefferson Davis own book.  Slaves have "natural affection" for the master,  he claimed, and it was a cruelty to keep slaves apart from their master.  The master takes care of his slaves, and it's a cruelty to keep slavery out of Kansas.  

Bet you also never heard that Davis claimed the resistance to slavery in Kansas was the "intolerable grievance".

Remember, Atchison was officially working for Jefferson Davis this entire time. Davis claimed everything Atchison did, was "constitutionally required"> 


Once in Kansas, Kansas newspaper reported Atchison's violent actions - first mostly intimidation, using his Missouri men,  to create a "bogus legislature"  and scare the shit out of most Kansas citizens. 

Events would prove Kansas whites rejected slavery 90 and 95%, both before Atchison got there, and after Atchison was unsuccesful in his efforts to force slavery there.

  The first vote against slavery was over Sadly, people today, even "history teachers"  seem to miss the basic point about those who claimed Kansas "trouble" would be solved by "letting the people decide".

Lincoln forced Douglas to switch.

Actually, the entire LIncoln Douglas debates were, in a way, Lincoln exposing Douglas fraud, and forcing Douglas to switch, at least on the surface.

Behind the scenes Douglas still helped Atchison's killing sprees and Davis.  Douglas is one of the most vile creatures in US politics, the books about this has not yet been written, but showe by.

The speech (in its entirety below) is just one of many speeches, documents, books, ultimatums, from Southern leaders themselves at the time.    

Shame on our "history" books for never candidly showing what Southern ledeaders BOASTED ABOUT TILL THEY LOST.

 He was talking about David Rice Atchison, US Senator.



Most "history teachers" we spoke to , will tell you Stephen A Douglas got Kansas Act passed -- and did so to settle the "unfortunate issue of slavery in the territories".

Actually, Douglas and Atchison both claimed credit for passing Kansas Act. According to newspapers in Kansas at the time, revealing another Atchison speech,  Atchison boasted he got Kansas Act passed.   Atchison by that time was already killing and terrorizing to spread slavery.

As Lincoln, Sumner, and most of the country realized by 1855, those who predicted Douglas was passing Kansas Act to help his Southern friends (Atchison and Davis)  to force slavery down the throats of Kansas.  Kansas act was "a vile ruse, by vile men, with the help of Stephen A Douglas"  is typical of the comments by people who knew Douglas and Atchison both.

Charles Sumner, for example, was one such man. 

According to Sumner's own speech -- Atchison left the US Senate immediately after Atchison and Douglas got Kansas Act passed.  

Why is this not common knowlege? It's not in dispute.  Atchison did in fact, show up in Kansas not long after he left the Senate, and there, in Kansas, started his "reign of terror"  if you believe local newspapers at the time.

Atchison and Douglas both claimed they just wanted the people of Kansas to decide "local issues" themselves.  But clearly, Atchison's actions were quite the contrary, once he got to Kansas.



Most people assume there were many folks in Kansas who wanted slavery, and that "both sides" were extremist with trouble makers.

 Hell no.  In fact, Atchison could find no  local "volunteers" for his terror -- Atchison paid his men, and they were from Missouri.  Every man Atchison worked with to spread slavery, was apparently paid - at first by him, but later by Jeff Davis, according to Atchison himself.

Turns out, Atchison could not hire enough in Missouri, so he hired men from Texas and South Carolina -- then things grew much worse for Kansas folks, and they were already bad enough.

Why are "history teachers" so ignorant of those "details".  Those are not details, they are as basic information as possible, about who killed who, and why, leading up to Civil War.

Numerous Kansas newspaper reported Atchison's arrival and activities, once he got to Kansas.  Including the report Atchison was boasting there, of passing the Kansas Act.

Can't read it?

The article quotes Atchison this way, first showing how drunk he was, and his demeanor....

"Gentleman, you make a damned fuss about Douglas -- Douglas -- but Douglas don't deserve the credit of this Nebraska bill. I told Douglas to intoduce it. I orignated it - I got Pierce committed to it, and all the glory belongs to me. All the South went for it -- all to a man but Bell and Houston.  Who are they? Mere nobodies-- no influence-- nobody cares for the."   

The speech was confirmed by those there at the time, later, and this is the kind of thing Atchison did blurt out other times, usually in a drunken boast. He was not called "Bourbon Dave"  for nothing.

Elsewhere, Atchison made it clear, his goal was not just Kansas Territory.


When his  first attempts at violence were not successful enough -- meaning, people still spoke against slavery and published newspapers against slavery,  Atchison boasted he would get 5000 men next time.

He never was able to get 5,000 men. Apparently, the most he could hire was about 800, and that was not enough.  He almost got the job done, however.


According to the famous "Crimes Against Kansas" speech, by Charles Sumner,  Atchison personally  got Kansas Act passed, went to Kansas, to make damn sure the people of Kansas could not possibly vote against slavery.

Atchison did not disagree, at all. Atchison boasted, when he got to Kansas, that he did, just as Sumner indicated, get Kansas Act passed.  And he did boast of killing to spread slavery.

Not sorta, not kinda, not in a way.  Not "well that's one way of looking at it."   

This is what Atchison did -- and he boasted of it. He did all but rent billboard space to explain to his Texas men, what he was doing, and why.

This may be news to you -- it was common knowledge at the time.  This is what got Lincoln back into politics. This is what brought about Dred Scott decision.



Already bragging this was war  -- that the "Entire South" wanted.  





Gentlemen, Officers & Soldiers! - (Yells) This is the most glorious day of my life! 

This is the day I am a border ruffian! (Yells.) The U.S. Marshall has just given you his orders and has kindly invited me to address you.

For this invitation, coming from no less than U.S. authority, I thank him most sincerely, and now allow me, in true border-ruffian style, to extend to you the right hand of fellowship. (Cheers.)
 Men of the South, I greet you as border-ruffian brothers. (Repeated yells & waving of hats.) 
Though I have seen more years than most of you, I am yet young in the same glorious cause that has made you leave your homes in the South. Boys I am one of your number today (Yells.) and today you have a glorious duty to perform, today you will earn laurels that will ever show you to have been true sons of the noble South!
 (Cheers.) You have endured many hardships, have suffered many privations on your trips, but for this you will be more than compensated by the work laid out by the Marshal, - and what you know is to be done as the programme of the day.
 Now Boys, let your work be well done! (Cheers.) 
Faint not as you approach the city of Lawrence, but remember your mission, act with true Southern heroism,  at the word, spring like your bloodhounds at home upon that damned accursed abolition hole;, break through every thing that may oppose your never flinching courage! -
Draw your revolver and bowie knives,  cool them in the heart's blood of all those damed dogs, that dare defend that d--d breathing hole of hell. (Yells.) 
Tear down their boasted Free State Hotel, and if those Hellish lying free-soilers have left no port holes in it, with your unerring cannon make some, Yes, riddle it till it shall fall to the ground. Throw into  the Kanzas their printing presses; let's see if any more free speeches will be issued from them!
 Boys, do the Marshall's full bidding!
 Do the sheriff's entire command! - (Yells.) for today Mr. Jones is not only Sheriff, but deputy Marshall, so that whatever he commands will be right, and under the authority of the administration of the U.S.! 
And for it you will be amply paid as U.S. troops, besides having an opportunity of benefiting your wardrobes from the private dwellings of those infernal nigger-stealers. (Cheers.) 
Courage for a few hours; the victory is ours, falter and all is lost! 
 Are you determined? Will every one of you swear to bathe your steel in the black blood of some of those black sons of bitches---- (cries, yells of yes, yes.) 
Yes, I know you wil,  the South has always proved itself ready for honorable fight; you, who are noble sons of noble sires, I know you will never fail, but will burn, sack and destroy, until every vestige of these Norther Abolitionists is wiped out.
 Men of the South and Missouri, I am Proud of this day! I have received office and honor before; - I have occupied the vice-presidents place in the greatest republic the light of God's sun ever shone upon; - but, ruffian brothers, (yells.) that glory, that honor was nothing, it was an Empty bsubble, compared with the solid grandeur and magnificent glory of this momentous occasion!
 Here, on this beautiful prairie-bluff, with naught but the canopy of heaven for my covering, with my splendid Arabian charger for my seat, to whose well tried fleetness I may yet have to depend for my life, unless this days work shall annihilate from our western world these hellish Emigrant Aid paupers, whose bellies are filled with beggars food, & whose houses are stored with "Beecher's Rifles  (Yells prolonged.)
 I say, here, with the cool breeze of the morning blowing fresh around my head, with the U.S. Marshall at my left, - completely surrounded by my younger brothers, (terrible enthusiasm.) each supporting a U.S. rifle, and on the manly countenance of each, plainly seen, his high and fixed determination to carry our to the letter the loft and glorious resolves that have brought him here
- the resolves of the entire South, and of the present Administration, that is, to carry the war into the heart of the country, (cheers.) never to slacken or stop until every spark of free-state, free-speech, free-niggers, or free in any shape is quenched out of Kansaz!

 (Long shouting and cheering.) And what is also pleasing beyond my powers of description, is the fact that, having above me, - as I speak the honest sentiments of my heart and the sentiments of the administration and  the blessed pro-slavery party throughout this great nation, - is the only flag we recognize, and the only one under whose folds we will march into Lawrence, the only one under which these d--d Abolishionist prisoners were arrested - who are now outside yonder tent endeavoring to hear me, which I care not a d--n if they do! (Cheers.) 

Yes, these G--d d--d sons of d--d puritan stock will learn their fate, and they may go home and tell their cowardly friends what I say! - I care not for them! - I defy and  d--n them all to Hell. (roars & yells.) 

Yes, that large red flag denotes our purpose to press the matter even to blood, - the large lone white star in the centre denotes the purity of our purpose,  the words "Southern Rights" above it clearly indicate the righteousness of our principles.

I say under all these circumstances I am now enjoying the proudest moments of my life, - but I will detain you no longer. (Cries of go on, go on.)

No boys! - I can not stay your spirit of patriotism, I cannot even stay my own; - our precious time is wasting. - No hasten to work, - follow your worthy and immediate leader, Col. Stringfellow!

(Yells.) he will lead you on to a glorious victory,  I will be threre to support all your acts assist as best I may in all your acts, assist completing the overthrow of that hellish party, in crushing out the last sign of damn abolitionism in the territory of Kanzas. - (Three times Yells for Atchison.)


This was not a surprising speech -- other Southern leaders said much the same thing.

Southern newspapers had for years called out for the arrest and hanging of folks in the North who even spoke against slavery -- IN THE NORTH.

It was illegal for anyone in the South to speak publically, preach publically, or even own a book, against slavery.

Very basic part of US history -- and no one told you.

No one. No one every told you that even preachers could be-- and were -- arrested just for owning the wrong book.

This was how slavery got so tenacious in the South -- it was against the law to speak or write or preach against it.

No one thought to tell you -- ever. I sure never heard that preachers were arrested and tortured for owning the wrong book.

Nor did I know, till I was about 60, that people in the South demanded  that the NORTHERN states also arrest people who published newspapers against slavery.

Who the fuck KNEW THAT?   But it's in SOuthern newspapers at the time.   

So when Atchison made it -- declared it -- illegal to speak or publish newspapers against slavery in Kansas, hell, that was normal stuff for slave states.   

That governmental control of speech - even religious speech -- is why slavery could not be challenged in the South.   Why the hell is that not taught in your schools?  Because most "historians" spend too much time reading each other's bullshit books, and not enough time reading Southern newspapers and documents, that brag about such things.

Other  Southern documents, including official documents,  pointed out that slavery was "of God" and condemned the North for "radical religious error". 


Remember this, when your "history" teachers tries to paint Kansas settlers as the problem, as if there were a lot of pro slavery farmers in Kansas,  and those mean old abolitionist caused problems.

There was so little local support for slavery, that Atchison and Davis had to hire men from Texas, mostly, to do the killing.

And there were almost no slaves in Kansas, and even fewer slave owners, in Kansas.   The killers were imported, and paid.  Remember that. 

You didn't know that either. Shame on US text books for not making these most basic facts known, instead repeating the false narrative that "anti slavery zealots" just "would not compromise".

Shelby Foote, in his usual disingenious old grampa schtick, acted like it was just a "shame" America didn't "compromise"  because "compromise was our genius, but we didn't do that"  with Kansas.

  There was no compromise with Atchison, he was not about compromise, he was about conquest.

"For the South and the present administration, we take the war into the center of the country"   

 Keep in mind, this was five years BEFORE the Civil War.   
It seems unreal, right, no way. NO WAY.  You would have heard of this, right?

Well you should have. The speech itself wasn't known then, but the killings and terror he caused were known, well known. 

In fact, you probably didn't know anyone killed to spread slavery, much less that a US Senator did,  and that he bragged about it.

The US Senator worked for Jefferson Davis -- officially -  as "General of Law and Order" in Kansas.

Your history text book probably left that out too.  Nor have heard Jefferson Davis claimed killing to spread slavery was justified, because the US Supreme Court ruled that blacks were not human beings, but property.

Not only were blacks not human beings - they could not be "acknowledged" as persons.   See this from Jefferson Davis own book

From Jeff Davis Book
"Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government"
page 84

Jefferson Davis claims blacks are "so inferior" they are not human beings, and can not be considered persons, by order of the Supreme Court. 

According to Atchison,  bragging about it, he started the Civil War in 1856.

Jefferson Davis insisted it did not matter what the people of Kansas wanted - Dred Scott had rendered that moot, by finding blacks were not human beings, not persons, for purpose of the law

If you think the Civil War was complicated,  it was not complicated to the men who boasted from 1854, that they were at war to spread slavery.   Excuses are complicated -- reasons, not so much

Davis excuse, for example, that slaves are "the most contented laborers on earth"  and have "a natural affection" for their master, is bullshit.  

This is Jefferson Davis -- claiming he was motivated to push slavery into Kansas ( and beyond)  because slaves have "an attachment" to the master.  Elsehwere Davis claimed slaves are "the most contented laborers on earth"  with a "natural affection" for the slave master.  Only the "evil serpent"  whispering the "lie of freedom"  makes them disatisfied".  

Atchison called it WAR.



Bullshit sounds smart -- and historians love to sound smart.   As the book "On Bullshit"  by  Frankfurt  essentially said, people love to sound smart by spewing bullshit.  That's what they really care about when writing a book, or whatever, they want to sound smart.  The desire to sound smart is more important -- yes it is - that the desire to get history right.  

History is no exception to that rule, and historians are just as guilty of it, as anyone, if not more so.   Bullshit increases in direct proportion the opportunity to use it, to impress others.  

And that was BEFORE Atchison got the Texas men.   Sumner's speech covered the two year period before Atchison was able to hire the Texas men.   Things grew much, much more violent, when the Texas men got there. 

or two years already, Atchison was in Kansas, terrorizing to spread slavery.    But Charles Sumner -- and hundreds of newspapers -- already exposed what Atchison was doing.  

The "logic" Davis used -- in his own book, and speeches -- was well known then.  Blacks are not human beings (not persons) but property.   This was "established"  by the Taney court in Dred Scott decision.

Davis was exactly right -- the Supreme Court said exactly that, in their ruling.    The Constitution recognizes slaves as property -- NOT PERSONS.   

Furthermore, the court "pledges"  the federal government to protect it - it, being slavery.

There is much more.   The story of Southern leaders violent killing sprees, their Orwellian excuses for doing so, has not been told -- not in US history books, and it's one that should be told.

It was common knowledge at the time, and it was the reason Lincoln got back into politics.


Why have "historians" not mentioned Davis logic to spread slavery?   I never found it, till I read his own book, and his wife's book, where they were both proud of it.

That's right, such amazing things in the South's own books, by their own leaders, at the time.

Even more amazing things in their letters, and newspapers, where they boast of killing to spread slavery. They boast of using terror.  They boast that they killed and will keep killing.

No, not some "bad" historian making things up later, I'm talking about what Southern leaders -- THEMSELVES -- at the time, boasted of.

 In a recent book about Davis, "historian" McPherson "forgot" to mention many of these excuses.  

 Yet they are in Jeff Davis own speeches, even his own book. 

Robert E Lee did not have slave girls whipped (yes he had slave girls whipped), because he thought God ordained slaves to feel painful discipline, though he used that as an excuse. Yes, in a letter to his wife, about whipping slaves (see "Reading the Man, by Elizabeth Pryor)  Lee defended "discipline"  which was torture, by his excuse that God ordained that.  God "knew and intended slaves feel painful discipline.... pain is necessary for their instruction."

Luckily -- enough of those Southern leaders  in power, bragged out the ass about who the killed and why, and who they worked for.   Their own speeches, their own books, their own documents, and above all, their own actions, show they were killing and terrorizing for the very reasons they claimed -- to spread slavery.

 Southern leaders, at the time BRAGGED their goals were.  These were not drunks, they were top Southern leaders. They were not caught in some "gotcha" moment, this was their clear, loud, and repeated boasts, at the time.

That is, until they lost. It is factually true, accurate, and not sophist at all, to say Southern leaders boasted out the ass of things at the time, that they would not dare whisper later, nor would their apologist whisper it.

If you don't know about these men, you probably know bullshit.   Get who killed who, and why, right. You wont be so gullible about the the Civil War.

Then men who started the fight, who bragged about starting the killing, who bragged about why they killed, knew what the hell they were talking about.    You should know them.  




Atchison and his "legislature" made it a crime  to speak against slavery.  Did you know that or not?

Very basic.  Hardly anyone knows today, and certainly this basic feature of the struggle in KS was about Kansas citizens being able to speak and vote against slavery.

Something Atchison made against the law.  Why is that not spoken of, it was a major issue then.  

You think you know the history of slavery in USA?  Not unless you know who killed who, and why.

Great excitement ? 

- they heard about a guy who was suspected of being against slavery.

They chased him.  They found him.  They tried to get him to sign a card that he was pro slavery.

He refused.

They arrested him. They tortured him.  They told him to leave the state,

And they bragged of it.  In their own papers, they bragged of it.

Later, they found him. He had not left, as they told him to.

They killed him

That was  not a group of thugs -- try to grasp that. That was Davis Rice Atchison and his men, acting officially.

They were being paid. P A I D. Who paid them?   See Atchison's speech. Jeff Davis paid them.   

It would also help if you know which politician controlled Kansas -- in congress. A guy named Stephen A Douglas was chairman of house and senate committee on Kansas.

On reason Lincoln tried to defeat Douglas in 1858, was to get his ass off of that commitee, where he was doing a world of damage to folks in Kansas, never mind what Douglas told people in public.

And by the way, Atchison boasted, and it was reported at the time he boasted (1854)  that he got Kansas act passed, and that  he wrote the languge.    Douglas was trying to take the "credit"  and Atchison, by then in Kansas, didn't like that.  In a drunken speech - which you can still see in papers from that time,  Atchison bragged he got it passed.

The folks who got Kansas Act passed -- try to grasp this, if you think you know history -  bragged they got it passed as a ruse, and LIncoln said as much.  

The leader?  David Rice Atchison.  His boss?  Jefferson Davis.  His other boss?  Stephen A Douglas.

Furthermore, Atchison's men were paid, they were not from Kansas, they moved to Kansas to help Atchison.    He ran out of Missouri men, and had to hire Texas and South Carolina men.

What where they hired to do?  To kill and terrorize, to spread salvery.

They were bragging about this -- get this through your head. 



Atchison Kansas raids, were to arrest or kill those who spoke -- just spoke -- against slavery. 

That was the purpose of his raid -- and he said so.   To shut down the Free State Hotel, and the newspaper they printed there.

Your history teacher will claim they know all about Sumner's speech. Bullshit.  If they knew Sumner's speech, they would teach about Atchison's killing sprees and that Atchison is the guy that got Kansas Act passed, then went to Kansas, and started terrorizing out there, according to Sumner.   


Atchison's actions (getting Kansas Nebraska bill passed) got Lincoln back into politics.  

Atchison's killing sprees in Kansas got the attention of the entire country, though the South approved of the killings as "our rights in the territories".

The untold story  is that only a few farmers out in Kansas Territory fought  back - at first.  Atchison,  however, demanded too much.

He demanded people not speak -- that's right -- not speak against slavery.  

And Atchison was by no means alone -- he had a t hired men, and the support of Jefferson Davis, Stephen A Douglas, and according to him, "every Southern man". 



It almost worked.    Atchison's quick invasion into Kansas, his use of violence and terror, almost got Kansas into Union as a slave state.


In speeches, Douglas pretended to be for popular sovereignty
but behind the scenes, Douglas helped Atchison, and covered for him.

 Douglas actively prevented official papers from Kansas to be submitted to Congress that would have proved Kansas citizens were against slavery overwhelmingly.

Stupidly, most "history" teachers claim Douglas was a champion of popular sovereignty, because he said so.  He spouted that in speeches.    But behind the scenes, a different story.  

That's too complicated for "historians" who honestly, are mostly too stupid to even wonder what did Douglas DO?   We know what  he said -- though he said all kinds of things, he was firmly on all sides of every issue, sorta like Newt Gingrich today.

The point is, without Douglas duplicity, Aitchison and Davis could not have started their killing sprees. They could not have passed Kansas Nebraska, they could not have used military at first to stop free speech in KS, then hired the Texas killers Atchison is talking about. 

Douglas knew all that, was part of all that.  


"Douglas, Davis, and Atchison worked together on Kansas. 

 The fourth son of a bitch, was Roger Taney. "


Why get Texas men?  You nor your history teacher even knew Atchison had killers in Kansas, so you could not know where he got them.

He got them from Texas.
Why?  Why get the killers from Texas?

Because almost no one local would kill to spread slavery.  There were not even enough men to do the killing in Missouri, right next door.

There were few citizens in Kansas who cared much about spreading slavery at all, much less to kill to spread slavery.

Gov Perry, from Florida, would make it very clear -- officially clear.  The SPREAD of slavery was the issue, not keeping slavery where it was.   That was not a worry to the South.

But not being able to spread slavery -- he specifically and formally announced -- was "like burning us to death slowly"

That may surprise you now -- but it surprised no one then, this was common knowledge.  


Slave owners and southern leaders sometimes gave bullshit speeches about "state's rights" -- yes.    That sounded better.  They were not about to say "We get more power, prestige, wealth, and slave women, if we spread slavery".   


The NORTH didn't start fighting back, till 1861, because frankly, most people in the North didn't give a shit about slaves,  and were not about to stand up the hot headed violent slave power folks. 

Jeff Davis wisely tried to avoid overtly attacking the US -  he would have prefered to bluff his way through, and almost did.  Bluffing and show of violence worked before.

   Davis even claimed no blood would be spilled below the Mason Dixon line -- he had already planned a military coup of Washington DC, if Lincoln showed up, but that was thwarted by General Scott, who suspected as much. 

 Even Lincoln tried to pacify Southern war ultimatums. He did not reject it out of hand. He refused to meet Alexander Stephens, who carried the ultimatums with him.  New York papers suggested Lincoln obey the Southern Ultimatums -- meaning, let South force slavery into Kansas, even after Kansas was in the United States as a free state.

  But the South was stupid -- Lincoln could not possibly do that, if he wanted.  The South, in its bravado and competition among the men to be more macho, had demanded something Lincoln could  not allow -- because Kansas was now officially a state.  It was a stupid move to demand the spread of slavery into Kansas, after Kansas became a US state.  But thats exactly what SOuthern leaders did -- even if your "history" teacher doesn't know that. 





States rights?  As you will see, Southern leaders, including Jeff Davis, hated states rights when Kansas rejected slavery, and sent killers to KS to force slavery into Kansas, and bragged about it, then.

 Yeah, yeah, you probably heard Jeff Davis was a big "state's rights" man. Bullshit.  Not about the SPREAD of slavery, he wasn't.  Details matter.

As you will see, when it came to the SPREAD of slavery, Davis did a complete 180 degree turn, and made up bullshit nonsense to explain why state's rights and popular sovereignty didn't apply to slavery.

 The excuse he used to force the spread of slavery was ---- Dred Scott decision.  

Yet Dred Scott decision came after -- after -- after -- the killing sprees. Davis rushed to get the Dred Scott decision in place, but that took two years.   He and Atchison were paying the Texas men to kill, that whole time.  And they promised to get 5000 more men, on top of the 1700, and just "kill them all" as Atchison said.

Not just Kansas, but the rest of the western US, if  possible. California had rejected slavery too, just like Kansas did.  




In fact, of all the amazing things in Atchison's speech, two things stand out. 1) He called it a war the "entire South" wanted, to spread slavery,.

And 2) He bragged he killed not just to spread slavery, but to silence opposition to slavery.

You didn't know that either.
  I know PhDs who claim they are "historians" who had no idea that Dred Scott decision specifically declared blacks are not persons, and that the same sentence ordered the federal government protect slavery, based on that logic of blacks being non - persons.

Yet Lincoln shouted out the injustice and horror of this decision -- because it said blacks were NOT PERSONS.  



Remember, Atchison hired 1700 men, bragged about the killings, worked for Jeff Davis, all these guys were paid. Atchison got Kansas Act passed, organized killing sprees, bragged that Kansas citizens were cowards, etc etc.

But read how WC Davis put it, in one of his boooshit books.  About as mild as you can write this "events quickly got out of hand"

Out of hand? No, dumb ass. As Atchison made very very clear, this was the plan -- to rid Kansas of anyone against slavery. He boasted of that, repeatedly, for years.  IN his letter to Davis, he boasted of it, in his speech to his Texas men, he boasted of out.

Out of hand?  God, these Southern apologists really are pieces of shit, and have no shame. 

The way WC plays it -- "Atchison supported pro-slavery group" .  

Atchison is killing abolitionist, terrorizing, arresting, promising to spread slavery allthe way to the Pacific, brags about it before hand, brags about it later, and to WC Davis, he explains "it quickly got out of hand".

 Like all Southern apologist, WC Davis is not going to tell you who killed who, and why.


What's the Secretary of War doing sending men to Kill in Kansas?

Notice, no biographer of Jeff Davis -- not one -- even mention his role in sending Atchison to Kansas, much less the killing sprees with 1700 men, nor Atchison  bragging about it. I've looked through a dozen biographies of Davis - they just avoid that topic or mischaracterize it.

 Gee, I wonder why?



Lying bastard, stupid, or hiding?



To hear guys like Kenneth Davis tell it, Jeff  Davis just cared soooo much for state's rights.

There are over 300 books about Davis,  over 100 biographies.   One Davis "expert" is Kenneth Davis, author of "Don't know much about  history" Kenneth Davis, in his narrative of what caused the Civil War, blames those bad old "extremist"  and make you think those damn Kansas radicals "would not compromise". 

He never --ever (nor do any other Jeff Davis apologist) even mention the army Davis paid for to kill and terrorize in Kansas. Not one word!

Do you think Kenneth Davis doesn't know about Atchison, and how Davis named him General of Law and Order?   Think guys like K Davis has no clue Atchison and Stephen A Douglas got the Kansas Nebraska Bill passed, then Atchison went to Kansas, worked for Davis, and started these killing sprees?

  You may not know what Charles Sumner said in his famous "Crimes Against Kansas" Speech - but Davis, and every other "Davis expert" does.

And he didnt even have the balls to include the word "slavery" in is Orwellian double tax "EXPANSIONISM WAS AN ISSUE".

We arent picking on K Davis  --all Davis apologist  do basically the same thing. Of COURSE they know Davis demanded the spread of slavery into Kansas, Davis was proud of it!  Davis  wrote about his demands to spread slavery in his own book. Do you think they did not read Jeff Davis own book?

Atchison and Stephen A Douglas got the "Kansas -Nebraska" bill passed in the US Senate, then Atchison rushed to Kansas to kill people who voted against, or spoke against, slavery.  This is a fundamental course of action -- not an event. 

First, Davis tried to use US troops, he was Secretary of War.  But those troops would only do so much, they would not invade cities,  like Atchison would, or use terror, like Atchison bragged of.




To justify the killings and terror in Kansas, Jefferson Davis claimed Atchison was doing what was "constitutionally required" - because of Dred Scott decision.

According to Davis, it did not matter what the vote in Kansas was against slavery -- the Supreme Court had ruled, slavery was protected, because slaves were property, not persons.

The "DAVIS LOGIC"  was the "Dred Scott decision, which claimed blacks were not human beings -- not persons.

 Atchison promised to kill all these people -- and many more.

He called them "abolitionist dogs"  and said he would wipe them from the face of the earth.

He didn't kill them all -- here some  of the "dogs"  -- survivors -- reunited 50 years later.

Shame on your history book for not telling you who killed who, and why.    150 years of bullshit is enough. 


  Jefferson Davis boasted of it -- blacks are NOT persons.   Stephen A Douglas boasted of it --the Supreme Court officially ruled blacks were not persons.

Atchison boasted of it.  Stephen A Douglas boasted of it.

You would think something all three men boasted about, as a major reason slavery should go into Kansas, would be important enough to mention.

What Southern leaders bragged of, you don't even know about, because our text books don't show it this way.


This was the basis -- the very basis, the very thing Davis said was the basis, that made it a crime for Kansas to reject slavery.     Did you know -- yes or no that Davis emphatically and clearly explained his "logic" to force slavery into Kansas?

Blacks are SO inferior, they were not human beings, and therefore, Kansas must protect slavery as they must protect any property.

 1) Southern leaders killed to spread slavery 
 2) Southern leaders bragged the logic to spread slavery, was that blacks are not human beings.

Even though this was well known then, even though Lincoln himself referred to the South's intention of spreading slavery by any means -- your history teacher does seem to make a big deal of that. WTF?

Turns out, everything Sumner predicted, happened.  Opening up Kansas was a ruse -- Atchison had no intention of letting Kansas vote against slavery.  


 The killings were not a one day, or one week, or even one year event, they were a process that lasted for years, up to, and all through, the US Civil War.


Most history teachers can't tell you Jeff Davis hired Atchison, or much else, because they don't know who Atchison was.

So they can't know Davis apparently sent him to Kansas to kill and terrorize, as early as 1854  -- because that is exactly what Atchison did, in fact, as soon as Atchison got near Kansas after he left the Senate, was to break into a federal armory and remove hundreds of weapons so his hired men could use them. 

Nor can most history teachers tell you that according to Jefferson Davis and the Dred Scott decision that blacks are not human beings but "so inferior" they are ordained by God to be enslaved.

Rather important things.  Certainly important as can possibly be at the time, because Jefferson Davis actually justified the killings in Kansas by the Dred Scott decision later.  Davis never did, however, explain the logic of sending Atchison to terrorize and kill in Kansas on the basis of Dred Scott decision when Dred Scott decision was not announced will after Atchison began his reign of terror.

Nor did McPherson ever -- not once -- tell folks of the relationship between Davis and Atchison and Douglas.

 The most important relationship of the 1850s. 

Bruce Catton had the same problem. 

"Real history is this -- who killed who, and why  --all else is commentary."       Mark Curran




Lincoln's letter about Kansas, to Joshua Speed, 1855

I do oppose the extension of slavery, because my judgment and feelings so prompt me; and I am under no obligation to the contrary. If for this you and I must differ, differ we must. You say if you were President, you would send an army and hang the leaders of the Missouri outrages upon the Kansas elections (ed Atchison);

 still, if Kansas fairly votes herself a slave state, she must be admitted, or the Union must be dissolved. But how if she votes herself a slave State unfairly -- that is, by the very means for which you say you would hang men? 

Must she still be admitted, or the Union be dissolved? That will be the phase of the question when it first becomes a practical one. 

In your assumption that there may be a fair decision of the slavery question in Kansas, I plainly see you and I would differ about the Nebraska-law. I look upon that enactment not as a law, but as violence from the beginning. 

It was conceived in violence, passed in violence, is maintained in violence, and is being executed in violence. I say it was conceived in violence, because the destruction of the Missouri Compromise, under the circumstances, was nothing less than violence.

 It was passed in violence, because it could not have passed at all but for the votes of many members in violence of the known will of their constituents

. It is maintained in violence because the elections since, clearly demand it's repeal, and this demand is openly disregarded.

 You say men ought to be hung for the way they are executing that law; and I say the way it is being executed is quite as good as any of its antecedents.

 It is being executed in the precise way which was intended from the first; else why does no Nebraska man express astonishment or condemnation?

 Poor Reeder is the only public man who has been silly enough to believe that any thing like fairness was ever intended; and he has been bravely undeceived.

That Kansas will form a Slave Constitution, and, with it, will ask to be admitted into the Union, I take to be an already settled question; and so settled by the very means you so pointedly condemn.

 By every principle of law, ever held by any court, North or South, every negro taken to Kansas is free; yet, in utter disregard of this -- in the spirit of violence merely -- that beautiful Legislature gravely passes a law to hang men who shall venture to inform a negro of his legal rights.

 This is the substance, and real object of the law. If, like Haman, they should hang upon the gallows of their own building, I shall not be among the mourners for their fate.

In my humble sphere, I shall advocate the restoration of the Missouri Compromise, so long as Kansas remains a territory; and when, by all these foul means, it seeks to come into the Union as a Slave-state, I shall oppose it.

 I am very loth, in any case, to withhold my assent to the enjoyment of property acquired, or located, in good faith; but I do not admit that good faith, in taking a negro to Kansas, to be held in slavery, is a possibility with any man

. Any man who has sense enough to be the controller of his own property, has too much sense to misunderstand the outrageous character of this whole Nebraska business. 

But I digress. In my opposition to the admission of Kansas I shall have some company; but we may be beaten. If we are, I shall not, on that account, attempt to dissolve the Union. 

On the contrary, if we succeed, there will be enough of us to take care of the Union. I think it probable, however, we shall be beaten

. Standing as a unit among yourselves, you can, directly, and indirectly, bribe enough of our men to carry the day -- as you could on an open proposition to establish monarchy. Get hold of some man in the North, whose position and ability is such, that he can make the support of your measure -- whatever it may be -- a democratic party necessity, and the thing is done. 

Appropos [sic] of this, let me tell you an anecdote. Douglas introduced the Nebraska bill in January. In February afterwards, there was a call session of the Illinois Legislature. Of the one hundred members composing the two branches of that body, about seventy were democrats.

 These latter held a caucus, in which the Nebraska bill was talked of, if not formally discussed. It was thereby discovered that just three, and no more, were in favor of the measure. In a day of two Dougla's [sic] orders came on to have resolutions passed approving the bill; and they were passed by large majorities!!! 

The truth of this is vouched for by a bolting democratic member. The masses too, democratic as well as whig, were even, nearer unanamous [sic] against it; but as soon as the party necessity of supporting it, became apparent, the way the democracy began to see the wisdom and justice of it, was perfectly astonishing.

You say if Kansas fairly votes herself a free state, as a Christian you will rather rejoice at it. All decent slaveholders talk that way; and I do not doubt their candor. But they never vote that way.

 Although in a private letter, or conversation, you will express your preference that Kansas shall be free, you would vote for no man for Congress who would say the same thing publicly.

 No such man could be elected from any district in a slave-state. You think Stringfellow & (Atchison) amp; Co. ought to be hung; and yet, at the next presidential election you will vote for the exact type and representative of Stringfellow. 

The slave-breeders and slave-traders, are a small, odious and detested class, among you; and yet in politics, they dictate the course of all of you, and are as completely your masters, as you are the master of your own negroes.

 You inquire where I now stand. That is a disputed point -- I think I am a whig; but others say there are no whigs, and that I am an abolitionist. When I was in Washington I voted for the Wilmot Proviso as good as forty times, and I never heard of any one attempting to unwhig me for that.

 I now do no more than oppose the extension of slavery.
I am not a Know-Nothing. That is certain. How could I be? How can any one who abhors the oppression of negroes, be in favor or degrading classes of white people?

 Our progress in degeneracy appears to me to be pretty rapid. As a nation, we began by declaring that "all men are created equal." We now practically read it "all men are created equal, except negroes" When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read "all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners, and Catholics." 

When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretence of loving liberty -- to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocracy [sic].

Mary will probably pass a day to two in Louisville in October. My kindest regards to Mrs. Speed. On the leading subject of this letter, I have more of her sympathy that I have of yours. And yet let me say I am