Wednesday, June 18, 2014

The most famous speech you never heard of --but should be in every US text book.




Southern leaders bragged about it then -- killing to spread slavery,  against state's rights.


"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."

"The resolve of the entire South, and of the present Administration, that is, to carry the war into the heart of the country, (cheers.)"


HELL NO.  1861 is when the North started fighting back. 

Southern leaders declared WAR (they called it war -- in 1856.). They killed -- officially, loudly and proudly, long before 1861.

See the speech - Atchison calls this a war, his goal was to kill, and the purpose was to spread slavery, for the "entire South". 

Oh you didn't hear this speech? You should have. Shame on the "historians" who gloss over it, and all it showed about Southern leaders at the time.

It just took five years for the US to respond to the killings Atchison was bragging about.

This is what the speech looked like, in writing, at the time.  

Here is where the speech is kept  now. It's not a secret. It's just not mentioned in US text btextbooks

Notice this  -- US Senator Atchison says it's a war, says it's a war to spread slavery for the South, and that he hates the USA.

He also says the flag he rides under is red, to show the blood he will spill to spread slavery.




Atchison brags ----
  1. purpose of killing spree was to stop speech against slavery
  2. Atchison and killers ride under foreign flag
  3. They were funded by federal authorities (Davis Secretary of War)
  4.  Men could keep loot they stole
  5.  Authorities (Davis and Pierce) wanted the war taken to  Kansas
  6. "The entire  South" wanted these killing
  7.  This was the happiest day of his life




"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 remembering your mission act with true Southern heroism, at the word,Spring like your bloodhounds at home upon that d--d accursed abolition hole; break through every thing that may oppose your never flinching courage! - (Yells.)

Yes, ruffians, draw your revolvers & bowie knives, & cool them in the heart's blood of all those d--d 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

[Page 2]

your unerring cannon make some, Yes, riddle it till it shall fall to the ground. Throw into the Kanzas (river) 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 benefitting your wardrobes from the private dwellings of those infernal nigger-stealers.

(Cheers.) Courage for a few hours & the victory is ours, falter & 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 ---- (cries & yells of yes, yes.)

Yes, I know you will, 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 & destroy, until every vestige of these Northern Abolitionists is wiped out.

Men of the South & Missouri, I am Proud of this day!

 I may yet have to depend for my life, unless this days work

[we] 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 ......

- the resolve of the entire South, and of the present Administration, that is, to carry the war into the heart of the country, (cheers.)

[We will never] 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 & cheering.)

as I speak the honest sentiments of my heart and the sentiments of the administration & the blessed pro-slavery party throughout this great nation, -  

[this] is the only flag we recognize, and the only flag under whose folds we will march into Lawrence, the only flag under which these damned abolition 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, .... I defy & damn 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 am now enjoying the proudest moments of my life, - 
......... I will be there to support all your acts, and assist completing the overthrow of that hellish party, & in crushing out the last sign of dammed abolitionism in the territory of Kanzas. - (Three times Yells for Atchison.)


  Remember, Jeff Davis and Southern leaders were in control of the military, until Lincoln got elected.   Davis, as you will see, kept the US military from stopping his Texas killers, that Atchison is talking to, in his speech.

The point is, killing to spread slavery started early -Southern leaders at the time called it a war.

 And they called it a war to spread slavery.

They were not kidding.


Aitchisons speech, to the men he just met, and was about to lead in first of three killing sprees into Kansas -- is below.  He brags "out the ass" this is war, and he tells the men what it's about.

Spreading slavery -- and killing those who dare to speak out against it, in Kansas.

Artist then showing the 3rd massacre in Lawrence,
as payback for citizens standing up to Atchison.

"For the entire South" said the Confederate leader, boasting about it at the time, 1856

No -- not hype. This is what he bragged about, and this is what he did.  Nor it is just this one speech -- there are a dozen documents from that period, showing he said similar things, and actually did the actions he spoke about.

But this speech is the most blunt description you will ever read, by a man about to lead a killing spree to spread slavery.

Atchison gave this  speech to his Texas men - recently hired, in fact, he had just met them.  Why did he hire Texas men, to come on a months journey?  Because he couldn't hire enough men in Missouri to do the killing.  


  • He rides under a red flag -- red for the blood he will spill,
  • He hates the United States flag, and is doing the will of "the entire South"
  • This day of killing is "the most joyous of his life"
  • He is working for the "present administration" in Washington"

Who is the "present administration"?   Jefferson Davis, his boss, as Secretary of War, and Franklin Pierce, President.

Atchison was not alone - Southern leaders would declare the spread of slavery an issue of life and death. Not spreading slavery would "exterminate the white race"  said Robert Toombs, Confederate Secretary of State, in his books and speeches.


Killing to spread slavery, and bragging about it.

Local artist, showing Lawrence the day after Aitchison's first killing spree.

Bet  you never heard of Jeff Davis and his "General of Law and Order" in Kansas justifying -- even boasting  -- of killing to spread slavery. 

No, you never heard of it.

Remember, this not some "historian" 100 years later explaining Atchison to make him look crazy-- this was Atchison then, and he claimed the "entire South" wanted this "war" taken into Kansas.

What war?  There was no war -- officially.  But as you will see, Southern leaders killed, and bragged, it was most certainly a war, a war to spread slavery.   

To the South, it was war, and they said so, to each other. They killed, and the bragged they would kill more.

When this method did not work -- the South seceded. 

States rights my ass.   Kansas whites voted 95 and 98% against slavery -- Atchison and Davis were acutely aware of that.   The entire reason for Atchison to go to Kansas, and kill, and terrorize, was to prevent Kansas from using their state's rights to reject slavery.

Try to grasp that.


  • True history, honest history, is told in true sentences.  . Simple sentences, active voice, no double talk:  who killed who, and why.   That's why David Rice Atchison candid speech is a priceless insight into who killed who, when, and why.

You never heard of David Atchison,   did you?  Hell no. You never heard that a US Senator went to Kansas, to kill to spread slavery, before the US Civil War?

Atchison promised to "kill every damn dog" who  was against slavery in Kansas.  And he tried.   Some "dogs" escaped, and took a picture in 1890.

 Here are some of the surviving dogs he and  his men couldn't kill, taken 40 years later.


There are dozens -- hundreds -- of other documents,  newspapers, speeches, written demands, etc,  bragging of spreading slavery by any means.  

Still, Atchison speech to his killers, is an especially candid expression of hate for free speech, promise to kill to spread slavery, and full of details about who paid him, who paid the men, and who wanted the killings.

The "entire South" wanted the killings -- according to Atchison. The "present administration" wanted the killings, according to Atchison.

Here is a letter from Strongfellow to a newspaper, at the time, promising to kill more, they will "continue to lynch, drown, tar and feather" anyone who spoke against slavery. 


Notice he specifically says they will kill those who "spout the heretical theories" --- he is talking about the theory that all men are created equal. 

 Do you grasp that?

 They will kill those people who spout (say or write)  such things.   This is much like other  official documents by Southern States, in 1861, claiming the North had committed "grievous religious error" in claiming all men are created equal, and allowed societies (groups) to form to speak against slavery. 

Your history books do not even mention the violent suppression of free speech, bragged about at the time, by Southern leaders in Southern states. No wonder you probably can't grasp that in Kansas, Atchison did indeed make it "illegal" to speak and write against slavery.

And he BRAGGED about it.  Got that? Atchison bragged he would kill and silence opposition to slavery.   Kill who resisted, silence or chase away he could not kill.


Atchison  bragged he would kill ever "damn dog" abolitionist, and forever "eradicate" them from Kansas, all of which, he claimed to the men, was the "will of the South".

Did you ever hear any of this? EVER?  One word of it? No. 

Hell no. 

Yet at the time, these killings rocked the US.  They got Lincoln back into politics, for one thing.

Today, we learn a white washed Orwellian double speak version of Kansas and the Southern leaders violent killing sprees there.  We are told of "Trouble in Kansas" -- usually making it seem like the "free soilers" were "radicals"  and violent.

Yes, after Atchison's killings sprees, Kansas men finally did fight back.  But "historians" need to show what happened, not repeat bullshit memes suitable for Southern school boards to allow in Texas school books.

For another, one of the most famous speeches of the 1850's was "Crimes Against Kansas" Speech" by Charles Sumner. Oh your teacher will claim he knows "all about" that speech.

Bullshit. Sumner named Atchison as one of the criminals in Kansas.  He was beaten almost to death, on the Senate floor, just for that much.

Yet  Sumner's speech was the day BEFORE the killing sprees really began.  What Sumner showed was horrible, but Atchison's Texas killers were just getting to Kansas. The killings would get far worse, in the next few days.

Just like Atchison was killing to stop speech against slavery in Kansas -- US Senator Sumner was beaten on Senate floor for speaking out.   People today just have no fucking clue how violent Southern leaders were.   It should not be a surprise -- because slavery itself is a violent enterprise, based on terror and overt public torture of slaves who disobey.

But for 150 years, we have been bullshit about the "Southern gentleman" .   They were more like sociopaths dressed up for church, based on their actions.

After the Crimes Against Kansas Speech, Atchison's role in the killings grew much worse, because as you can see from the speech, the Texas killers got there, Atchison had not met them, until that moment, as he says. 

Who killed who -- and why -- from the guy in charge of killing, at the time.

That's basic history. Simple, declarative sentence, bragging by the guy who was doing the killing, telling you who, why, and when.

Guess who knew all about it? Lincoln.

Lincoln said so -- by the "logic" of Southern leaders use of force and Dred Scott decision, either we will be all free, or all slave states.

When the South openly used killing -- and bragged of it -- and then came up with Dred Scott decision that blacks were not human beings but property (see below) there was no way out. 

If slavery could be pushed into KS, whose people voted overwhelmingly against it --by what means could it be kept out of anywhere?

Lincoln was not being rhetorical -- we would all slave (states) or all free (states).  He was being clear. The "logic" pushed to force slavery into Kansas was not limited to Kansas.  

If they could press slavery into Kansas, that voted against slavery 95% -- by an act of Southerners on United States Supreme Court --you could go to sleep in a free state, and wake up in a slave state, said Lincoln.

Today people hear Lincoln's speech, and think he MUST be saying that for effect. All slave, or all free?

No -- because of Dred Scott order (yes order) that blacks are not persons, but property, and that the government must protect slavery -- there was no longer any way to stop the spread of slavery, other than pass a Constitutional Amendment against slavery (Which LIncoln did).  It took the Civil War to undo the violence by Davis, and the vile ruling by Taney that blacks are not human beings for the purposes of low.

If Dred Scott held -- there was no way to stop the spread of slavery.  

Charles Sumner, beaten almost to death on Senate floor, immediately after his speech naming Atchison and the "Crimes Against Kansas"

The next day, Atchison gave his speech, below, to his hired killers, and invaded Kansas to attack the citizens of Lawrence. 

Guess who else knew?  Jeff Davis knew- he sent the killers and Atchison. 

Davis knew well, that Kansas voters rejected slavery by repeated votes, and that they fought  back against Atchison and his paid killers.   Yet, Davis still demanded the spread of slavery into Kansas, as a war ultimatum, in 1861.


Jefferson Davis sent Atchison  to Kansas.  Atchison left the Senate abruptly, after he got Kansas Nebraska bill passed to open up slavery to a vote in KS.

Atchison made sure KS folks didn't get to vote at all.   In the"election" arranged by Atchison, there was no way to vote against slavery. 

Atchison invaded KS first and brought hundreds of Missouri men with him, to set up what is now regularly now called "Bogus Legislature" .

It should have been called -- fraud legislature imposed by violence by David Atchison, paid for by Jeff Davis. But that's too long of a name, yet accurate.


Jefferson Davis, as US Secretary of War then, immediately named Atchison the "General of Law and Order in Kansas".  So the man who created the bogus legislature, was now the General of Law and Order.

Despite 95% of KS white citizens being against slavery -- Jeff Davis and Atchison set up a defacto and slave owner legislature.

Despite there only being 2  slaves in the entire state of KS in 1860 census, and despite 95% votes against slavery. 

That's right 2 slaves in the entire state. Yet Davis had 1700 men from Texas in Kansas --he paid them - to terrorize and kill.  Those are the men Atchison is talking to. 


Kansas rejected slavery -- overwhelmingly.  White voters there did not want slavery.  Kansas whites tried to set up their own legislature, and Jeff Davis had them broken up by the US Army.

But the Army would not do more than that.  They would not attack Lawrence for continuing to publish an anti slavery newspaper. 

That's why Atchison got his men from Texas. 

 There was very little slavery in Kansas -- only two slaves in the entire state, in 1860 census.   There simply was no local support for slavery in Kansas.  Atchison had to find men from outside KS, so he did.

The killers -- as you will see -- came from Texas, and were hired by Atchison.

Even though Kansas rejected slavery time and again, by vote, and by arms, Southern leaders used any means -- including violence and terror -- to spread slavery there.

It almost worked. 


The only reason anyone repeats the Orwellian bullshit that  the South cared about states rights, is they are stupid of what Southern leaders bragged out the ass about then, and did, at the time.

Men who sell children and whip slave girls, do not give a shit about state's rights anyway.   

But more than just being slavers - the top Southern leaders bragged out the ass, at the time, they hated state's rights, when Kansas rejected slavery by votes of 90% and more.

In other words, state's rights was a term they used (mostly later) to fool the stupid.   At the time, they were loud and proud -- Kansas could NOT reject slavery, even if 90% and more of the white men there voted and fought against it.

None bragged more candidly, however, than US Senator, and Jeff Davis own "General of Law and Order in Kansas"  than David Rice Atchison.  

You find out, from his speech, that: 

1) US Senator, brags he is working for "the entire South" to take the war into Kansas.

2) Jefferson Davis personally sent Atchison to Kansas.

3) Atchison hired 1700 Texas men, with money from Davis, to do the killing.

4) They ride under a foreign flag, and hate the United States.

Left out of US text books.

 The violence to spread slavery is not taught bluntly in our text books -- but it  was common knowledge then. Charles Sumner spoke of Atchison in his "Crimes Against Kansas" speech, the day before the first of Atchison's killing sprees. 


The news of the killings in Kansas inflamed the North -- but was cheered by the South, who claimed they had "rights" in the territories to decide if Kansas had slavery or  not.

Sound like state's rights to you?

Davis would forever defend Atchison's actions as "Constitutionally required" -- in that Orwellian double speak Davis was so good at. 

There is no better teacher on this matter, than Atchison's speech to his troops, the men from Texas, just before the first invasion of, and killing spree, in Lawrence Kansas. 

There is no dispute that this is Atchison's speech, he said other things  just like it, and his collaborators bragged of it in these terms too, as you will see. 

There are dozens of other documents showing Southern leaders were killing to spread slavery --not admitting it, but bragging about it.

But none are quite so specific and proud as David Rice Atchison speech. The speech is to the Texas men, he just met, as you can tell from the speech.   He is pumping them up, for the killing that they were hired to do, and were about to ride off, to accomplish. 

And they did accomplish the killings. But they lost overall. Kansas men eventually fought back, and Kansas became a free state despite the efforts and payments to the killers.

Dogs -- to Atchison -- was anyone who spoke against slavery.

Jeff Davis sent Atchison to Kansas, named him "General of Law and Order"
Davis paid Atchison and the 1700 men from Texas.   He was Secretary of War at the time.


The cane used to beat Sumner
for his speech exposing the "Crimes Against Kansas" is still, to this day, shown a symbol of Southern pride.

How is Atchison shown  in US textbooks today?   Hardly at all. 

In fact, idiotically, most history teachers who know  his name at all, think he was, arguably, President of US for one day.  A trivia question, for a game. 

The history of Southern leaders, killing and bragging about it, to spread slavery, has been essentially erased from US text books.

But it was common knowledge then. Southern newspapers defended their "rights" in Kansas -- never bothering to tell folks that 90% plus of the people in Kansas voted and fought against slavery. 

Northern newspapers too, were filled with information and editorials about the crimes in Kansas.   New  York papers -- because of the telegraph -- got news within a day or two, when before, it took months to get news, which was by then old news. 

Do this test -- ask your teacher who David Atchison was.  They won't know.  Yet he was the guy who got Kansas Nebraska bill passed in US Senate, then went to Kansas to kill to spread slavery.

And your history teacher doesn't know.  He or she should, and they should know who hired him, what he did, and what he bragged about.
Remember this, Southern leaders (Atchison is merely one) didn't admit it -- they boasted about it.  Loud and proud, from the rooftops. 


Excuse the French, but did you know that by 1856, Southern leaders were bragging out the ass about killing in Kansas?  

It's important to know, they didn't admit it, they BOASTED of it.  And promised more killing -- to spread slavery more. 

That's right. They boasted of, and promised more killings.

This was not some "lone nut" drunk at a bar, this was US Senator David Rice Atchison, working for Jefferson Davis, then Secretary of War. Atchison was paid, his official position was "General of Law and Order In Kansas Territory". 


"KANSAS TROUBLE" --. Orwellian double speak for paid killers, from Texas, sent by Jefferson Davis,  their leader bragging he hated the United Sates and rode under a foreign (Confederate) flag, red to denote the blood he would spill to spread slavery.

Oh the killings are  mentioned -- sorta kinda, as you will see.  But mentioned in a way that often blames the "radical" free soilers.

That's why the documents, speeches, and books, bragging about killing to spread slavery, should be in our US text books. 

Never mind that the "radical free soilers" were killed, tortured, and terrorized, and finally started fighting back.   It took a while for the Kansas farmers to fight back, but they did.

If there is an unsung group of men who caused slavery to end -- it is the men in Kansas, fighting the US government under traitor Jeff Davis, who used his position as Secretary of State to kill and terrorize a territory. 

Stupidly, US text books act as if "both sides were equally to blame"  or as Kenneth (I love Jeff Davis) put it, "they failed to compromise".

So your school books never even mention the killing sprees, never mention the invasion of Kansas by 1700 paid men from Texas, never even mention Atchison at all, and of course, don't show the speeches, documents and newspaper articles from the South bragging of it.


The first thing Atchison did -- remember, he was a US Senator, working as "General of Law and Order" for Jeff Davis -- was to set up, by force, a "bogus legislature" as it's now called. 

That "legislature" made it a crime to speak against slavery. Really.

Another little "detail" your history teacher has no clue about.


 These laws -- anti-incendiary laws they were called - already existed in every slave state in the South.  Bet you didn't know that either. Bet your history teacher still doesn't know.   

These laws outlawed public speaking against slavery, including any written material against slavery.  Even preaching against slavery was outlawed -- on the theory that such speech would "dissatisfy the slaves"  and cause rebellion.

When Atchison arrested and killed -- he was, in his mind -- excused by lawful authority.  In fact he says that in his speech.

In fact, Jefferson Davis would back Atchison up -- when Kansas farmers appealed to Washington for help against the Texas killers, under Atchison, not only did Davis and President Pierce not help, they had those they could locate, arrested.

Read the speech and other documents, Atchison is bragging of that.   Remember, he does  not admit these things, he brags about them.

Yet overwhelmingly -- then and later -- white males in KS voted against slavery by stunningly high ratios -- 90% and 95%.   Jeff Davis, as you will see below, later had a "logic" about that. 

Davis demanded the spread of slavery into Kansas -- as a war ultimatum -- in 1861.  And he was already demanding the spread of slavery -- by killing -- in 1856.

This is the most overlooked, but basic fact, leading up to the Civil War.  Oh -- everyone knew it then.  See almost any Northern editorial, or conversely, the Southern papers, demanding the spread of slavery -- into Kansas, by any means.

No one was surprise, not a single person, when the Confederacy, after they seceded, issued Five Ultimatums, according to Southern newspapers, bragging about it.     The first two of the five ultimatums were about the spread of slavery into Kansas.

Davis hired Atchison, and paid for his 1700 men from Texas.  See Atchison explain that in his speech.

Davis insisted states rights did NOT matter in the case of slavery-- because blacks were "so inferior" they were not persons, but property.    See his own book, where he lays that out as clearly as he dares.  

Here below, is the official document by Florida state "Declaration of Causes" -- Governor Perry made it very very clear, just stopping the SPREAD of slavery would be "like burning us slowly to death".

That's not some nut yapping in a bar. That's the governor of a SOuthern state in the official document, telling the world why the seceded.  BECAUSE OF THE SPREAD OF SLAVERY 

So no one was surprised-- SOuthern leaders, had demanded for decades the spread of slavery.   And when Kansas rejected slavery-- didn't matter, Southern leaders just send Atchison out there, he hired the killers from Texas.

Remember -- Atchison bragged he was doing the will of the South.  Try to grasp that.   From 1856, he was bragging the will of the South, was the spread of slavery.

And he would kill to spread slavery -- for the South.

But this is not how it's taught now.  It was widely known then, Southern leaders bragged about it.  It's just glossed over in text books now.

So what stupid people do, is take a sentence or two from Lincoln -- out of context, and ignore the 10,000 things he said and did to end slavery.

But the stupid bastards don't even know who Atchison is, and don't even know about Southern War Ultimatums of 1861, and don't even know about the Kansas killing sprees, from 1856 on.

It's a very good bet, you never heard any of this before.   Nor has your history teacher. But it was well known then. Try to grasp that, you won't be so stupid.



You are told about Kansas killings, in every history text book in USA -- but in Orwellian double talk, as "Trouble in Kansas"  and "border ruffians".  No names, as if "Trouble" fell out of the sky and there were "extremist" who "could not compromise".  Not one text book even mentions Atchison in connection with the killing sprees.
Yet Atchison is the guy that hired the killers, led the killers, and bragged about it.

Why use killers?  Why not just let those folks in Kansas decide?

 Because 95% of  whites in KS were against slavery.  

That's right, in Kansas, most people already there, were very much against slavery. Did anyone every tell you that?  Hell no.

Atchison and Davis tried a quick but violent approach --not unusual for slave masters, who operated on the basis of violence.

That violence didn't work -- largely because one of the men Davis paid to help Atchison, changed sides, and told the truth: all Davis and Atchison cared about, he said, was to spread slavery into Kansas, even though it was very clear most people did not want slavery.

They should make a movie about that guy.

Atchison was not playing around -- and he said so.

Because most people do not know about the violent, decades long killings to spread slavery -- they get so many things wrong.

Some stupid people think slavery was about to end anyway.  What their evidence is, who the hell knows. Southern leaders were bragging out the ass it would spread West and around the world, per their kind of slavery, for God and White superiority. 

Since we are not taught about the violent, unrelenting efforts to spread slavery, from 1820 on, we also don't learn how the violence grew much greater, when Kansas rejected slavery.

Dred Scott decision pushes slavery -- orders the federal government to protect slavery -- declared blacks are inferior beings, not human beings.

Slavery was spreading,  and with the Dred Scott decision,  which mandated (ordered, literally) the fed government to protect slavery, even in Kansas.   Never mind that overwhelmingly people rejected slavery.

This is what most people don't grasp about how Dred Scott decision changed everything-- from supposedly letting the territories decide, to mandating the spread of slavery.

In a way, Alexander Stephens was correct.  No need to secede, he told folks.  We control everything.  But when Lincoln won the Presidency - he would control the Army.   No longer did the slave owners have control of the Army.  Jefferson Davis had been Secretary or War -- and look what  he did. He made sure the Army did not bother his killers from Texas.


Davis control of the US Army, during the killing sprees, was the only reason he got away with it.  He had the US Army break up Kansas farmers who were trying to establish their own legislature -- before Atchison killing sprees.

But the US Army would not invade a peaceful city, to burn, terrorize and kill.  
That is why Davis paid to for the Texas men, to invade.

Why the hell this aspect of our history is not taught, I don't know. Davis hiring the killers, and being Secretary of War, with slave owners or sympathizers in control of White House (therefore the Army) was the most important single fact in Kansas killing sprees, followed by Dred Scott decision. 



Kansas was a huge territory, much larger than the state of Kansas today.  But the issue was not Kansas, so much as the rest of the USA.

And guess who said so ? Jefferson Davis said so. David Atchison said so. And Lincoln said so.  These leaders knew - well -- that if Kansas voters were killed, terrorized, and bullied by the killers, and by Jeff Davis, and by the Dred Scott decision,  that formula made it impossible for ANY state to resist.

What the hell do you think Lincoln was talking about in "House Divided"?  Think he was kidding?

Hell no he wasn't kidding. And he knew what he was talking about.

Lincoln was against the SPREAD of slavery  - and he sure as hell was not going to obey the Southern war ultimatum, to force slavery into Kansas.

But you had no idea that Southern leaders were already killing in Kansas, for years.

And you had no idea that SOuthern leaders even issued war ultimatums.

So you didn't know shit, to be blunt.

Think about that -- Southern leaders demanded the SPREAD of slavery into Kansas.   They had tried for years, via Atchison, to spread it by killing.

In 1861, these same Southern leaders, who know Kansas had rejected slavery overwhelmingly, still  demand the spread of slavery there, in fact, the demand for spread of slavery, is their top two war ultimatums.

Are you getting this yet?  Southern leadership were obsessive about spreading slavery --none more so that Jefferson Davis.

And if that meant killing to spread slavery, they got guy like Atchison and the 1700 men from Texas, to do it.


Lincoln got back into politics because of Kansas, and the spread of slavery there.  Read the Lincoln Douglas debates,  the SPREAD of slavery was the issue, one way or another, in nearly every sentence out of his mouth. 

Lincoln first sought to stop the SPREAD of slavery.   That was the only way he could see to end it, stop the spread, and like a cancer, slavery would destroy the host. 

And Southern leaders said the same thing -- to stop the spread of slavery will kill us. 

People today don't seem to grasp that. Yet Lincoln and Southern leaders agreed -- stopping the spread of slavery would eventually destroy slavery. 

The forced birth rate of slaves doubled their population, while white's left the South, and so their population grew much slower.   Eventually, at that rate, slaves would outnumber whites 2-1, then 3-1.

Slavery had spread for years, by means foul, by killing, and terrorizing.   No one wanted to fight a war over it, however. 

But Southern leaders forced the war -- and called it a war, as early as 1850.   Yes, the NORTH started to fight back in 1861, but you should know, as Atchison bragged about, it was war to the South already.   

Still,  Lincoln was not about to obey these goofy war ultimatums. Spread slavery in Kansas, where 90% of the whites were against it?  By killing?

The only way slavery was going into Kansas, was if David Rich Atchison and Jeff Davis killed enough men there, to coware the rest, or have them leave.   Yet they demanded the spread of slavery there, anyway.

Your history teacher never heard of those war ultimatums, because they are not in your text book. They are in original documents, like the speech by Atchison, that are glossed over, and ignored. 

Stop the growth of that cancer, and the cancer dies.

Lincoln and the South agreed on this -- stopping spread of slavery will certainly, over time, end slavery.

 And the governor specifically mentions ---no one is saying Lincoln is trying to end slavery, just the spread of slavery.  But that is enough, just stopping the SPREAD of slavery was a life and death issue to the South.


Bet you didn't know that Kansas white males voted against slavery 90% in one election, 95% in another.  We have yet to see that basic fact in any US text book. 

Amazing what you don't know, because our text books have largely whitewashed any blame from Southern "heroes" like Davis and Lee.




But more, you had no idea states could, and did, make it illegal to speak against slavery.   Atchison was killing folks for speaking against slavery after he outlawed it.

That sounds bizarre, right?   But it was common knowledge then, these laws were not secret.   Even preachers were arrested in the South, not just if they spoke against slavery, but if they owned a book which QUESTIONED slavery, they could be arrested.

For an example of a preacher arrested for owning the wrong book, see click here

This was no surprise to anyone alive in 1850s.   But it's a big surprise to people alive now, we are not told about Southern states oppressive laws against free speech, or religious speech, against slavery.

Here Atchison brags about arresting people -- and killing people -- who spoke against slavery.   His own assistants wrote newspapers promising to kill those who "spouted herisis".   But tell the average high school history teacher about this, and they have no clue. It's not in their texts books like that.

You have to look at original sources for it. Why on earth not mention this basic fact in US text books?

Idiotically, text books give the impression that there were many people in Kansas who wanted slavery, and many who did not.

Bullshit.  Atchison had to HIRE -- pay -- men from Texas to come up to do the killing. In 1860 census, there were a total of two slaves in Kansas!!    There were very few people in Kansas who actually wanted slavery in Kansas.  Yet you never get that from basic fact from text books.

 Kansas joined the US in 1861, just before Lincoln took office.  But the killing continued -- the same people did the killing, for the same reason, all through the US Civil War.

Bet you didn't know that, either.

Try to grasp this -- because your history teacher sure as hell doesn't.  Kansas whites were overwhelmingly against slavery, as events would prove.

But Southern leaders invaded Kansas -- invaded is the right word --  with an army of hired thugs from Texas, to kill and terrorize to anyone against slavery in Kansas.

Not only that, they promised more killing if anyone spoke against slavery in Kansas.

If the 1700 killers from Texas were not enough, US Senator said he would get 5000 more men, and kill everyone in Kansas that was against slavery.

That's  not hype --read the damn speech.



Atchison made it very clear what the goal was -- the spread of slavery not just in Kansas, but all through the West.

After they lost the  Civil War, the same folks who bragged about killing to spread slavery before and during the war, claimed all kinds of excuses.

But in candid speeches at the time, they bragged they were killing to spread slavery.  


There are hundreds of other documents -- at the time -- showing Southern leaders justifying the killing, or admitting the killings in Orwellian terms. 

Like these Five Ultimatums, issued by Southern leaders, after the seceded, but before the Civil War actually started.

The first two war ultimatums -- the spread of slavery into Kansas.   Remember, by then Kansas had already been admitted as a free state.  They had already fought back successfully against Atchison and his 1700 killers.

But here, in their own newspapers, Southern leaders demand the spread of slavery -- INTO KANSAS. Specifically into Kansas.

Try to grasp that. Try to grasp how fucking nuts they were about slavery into Kansas (and beyond).   

State's rights? No one fought harder to destroy state's rights, that Southern leaders.  

But this speech is unique, because it's a speech from US Senator, to his army of hired killers, about to ride out, to do the killing.

The speech is a "pep talk"  to men he just met, by Atchison, literally minutes before the first killing spree.

As you can tell by the speech itself, Atchison was loud and proud -- the most joyous day of his life!

He was working for "the present administration" and the slave owners in the South.  That is what he said.

His goal was to kill every "damn dog"  that was against slavery, or even those who spoke against slavery.

That is what he said.

And remember, over 90% of Kansas white males were against slavery.  Don't forget that.  Killing to spread slavery is vile enough, but in Kansas, Southern leaders killed to spread slavery AGAINST the overwhelming wishes and votes of the whites in Kansas.

It's the best history lesson of the cause of the Civil War, by a US Senator bragging about killing to spread slavery long before he Civil War started.

It's clear from his speech (see below) that the South and Southern leaders specifically called this a war, to spread slavery.  No bullshit excuses, just spread slavery, and kill/terrorize to do it.

A remarkable speech by a remarkable US Senator you never heard of.

Atchison promise to kill everyone in Kansas who was against slavery.  He  promised to come back later, and kill more, if that wasn't enough.

It wasn't enough.  


This depicts the killing spree led and paid by Atchison, working for Jeff Davis, drawing by local artist the day after the first killing spree led by Atchison.


Then kills to spread slavery.  He promised to kill more, if that wasn't enough.

It wasn't enough.  He tried to kill more.



The killings in Kansas, led by Atchison, paid for by Jefferson Davis,  was well known at the time -- the biggest news in US for years.

Why is it not taught, using Southern leaders own words, own documents, own speeches, own newspaper reports, own demands to spread slavery by all and any means?

Probably because Southern school boards wouldnt allow it.  And still do not allow, such information in text books.  Texas companies have dominated US text book business from the start.

The famous "Crimes Against Kansas" speech, that US Senator Charles Sumner was beaten almost to death for, on the floor of the US Senate, was about these men --in Kansas.   

And the killings in KANSAS led direction to US Civil War.

Why not show what the leaders bragged out the ass about, at the time?


1856 = Five years BEFORE the Civil War.  

Before Lincoln got back in politics.

Before Lincoln Douglas debates.  Before the South seceded. 

What was a US Senator doing in Kansas, killing to spread slavery?

This was not one guy, on his own.  He worked for, was paid by, the US Secretary of War, Jefferson Davis.  Jefferson Davis defended his actions, later, as "constitutionally required".

And why on earth is this not in your text books?  Well, it is, in a white washed way.

Just remember this: Southern leaders were in Kansas, killing to spread slavery, and bragging about it. And Southern newspapers, books, documents, even sermons, were glad about it.


Bet you never heard of any of this. His full speech is below, a candid speech to a group of killers he just met, and hired, from Texas. 

One of three massacres in Lawrence Kansas -- artist at the time shows the third massacre, here.  

This depicts the last of three killing sprees into Lawrence -- Atchison led and paid for the first
Atchison led the first killing spree, five years BEFORE the Civil War. The killings continued all the way through the Civil War.  

Atchison even promised to kill more.   Then kills more. For a killer, this US Senator was refreshingly candid.


" What Southern leaders bragged out the ass about then, Southern apologists dare not whisper now."


White washed from US text books,  is the nearly rabid, violent, and unrelenting efforts by Southern leaders to spread slavery, by any means whatsoever. Like killing.Like destroying US cities with hire killers from Texas.

Like invading Kansas with 1700 men, paid by Jefferson Davis as Secretary of War, in 1856-1857.

You heard right, David Atchison, US Senator, bragged about hiring 1700 men from Texas to invade Kansas, to kill and terrorize.

He didn't fucking admit it, he fucking bragged about it.

And he worked for, with the approval and money from, Jefferson Davis.

In fact, officially, Confederate leaders issued war ultimatums after the seceded -- not to reunite with the US, but war ultimatums that Lincoln must obey to avoid war.  Let me repeat that - SOuthern leaders issued war ultimatums, that slavery MUST spread into Kansas.   Not demands, not slogans for talking about, but WAR ULTIMATUMS.

This came as no suprise to anyone alive at the time.

The South issued war ultimatums after they seceded.   To avoid war,  slavery had to be spread.    Edward Pollard, Richmond newspaper editor, boasted in threats in his paper that if Lincoln were elected -- because he was against the spread of slavery -- the South would take this as an act of war.

This is exactly what Southern leaders had been saying and doing for generations. Spreading slavery.



There was already war -- and had been killing sprees -- in Kansas for years, as shown by Atchison's speech, Sumner's speech. As shown by the deaths and attacks on Lawrence, and killings all over the eastern part of Kansas.

There was already killing, and the goal was clear, and boasted of.
To SPREAD slavery. 

But somehow, people today think the South just wanted to keep slavery. BULLSHIT. They were expanding it, bragging about it, and killing to do it.  

No matter that Kansas whites voted 90% against slavery, no matter if everyone knew Kansas whites wanted slavery kept out of their state.

Spreading slavery -- said Davis -- was a right.  Southern newspaper agreed. Confederate leaders spread the hate and fear, by claiming that without spreading slavery, white race would be exterminated.

Lawrence was attacked again, and again, for resisting Atchison, and publishing anti slavery newspaper, after Atchison declared that illegal.

Did you know, did anyone tell you, that per laws "passed" by Atchison and his "legislature"  made it a crime to publish anything against slavery?  

Southern states already had laws against speaking against slavery, and publishing newspapers against slavery.   Atchison invaded Kansas, set up the bogus legislature, and "passed" those "laws" in Kansas.

Bet you didn't know that, because no one told you. You only know what you are told.



Summed up in one quip -- Davis "logic" was that Dred Scott decision said he would spread slavery.   And, perverse and vile as that was, he was right.  Dred Scott DID actually order the federal government to protect slavery -- never mind if 90% of the white people in Kansas were against it.   

Davis and others said this at the time, in clever legalese.  Here is from his own book,  he says it was all about the rights of South to SPREAD slavery, per Dred Scott decision.  

This too is not taught -- the Dred Scott decision is taught is total bullshit in our schools,  idiotically claiming it was about citizenship.  God what idiots, did they READ the damn decision, did they read how Davis used it to justify the spread slavery -- by any means, including killing.

We  have looked in over two dozen respected "history books"  which give some boooshit about "citizenship".   Hell the decision said blacks were INFERIOR BEINGS, dumb ass.   So inferior they were NOT HUMAN BEINGS but property.

How the hell did they not read the fucking decision they are "teaching".  Read this.  It matters.

Here is from Davis own book  -- read the damn words, he is telling the world about his logic to spread slavery by force.   He wrote it in his typical pathological way, but it's there.

ven after the killing sprees, even after the Civil War, Jefferson Davis --to his dying day -- insisted the South had a right to spread slavery into Kansas and beyond, because of Dred Scott decision.

Did you know that -- or not? Did your history teacher ever tell you the South demanded the spread of slavery, about the killing sprees in Kansas? Did they tell you about Southern ULtimatums, or about US Senator  David Rice Atchison leading 1700 men from Texas into Kansas to kill and terrorize, for one purpose -- the spread of slavery.

Hell no. You never heard it. Instead, you get Orwellian double talk about "Trouble In Kansas".  As if no one did anything really wrong, as one Southern apologist said "It just got out of hand".

Out of hand?  These guys went to Kansas to kill. They bragged about killing.   It was widely known then.  Why the F is it not taught -- as they bragged about at the time -- in any US school? 

Atchison and his Texas men,  are about to invade Lawrence Kansas, on the first of three killing sprees there. 

Not about protecting slavery -- there were only two slaves in Kansas. This was about expanding slavery, into Kansas and beyond,  never mind state's rights, popular sovereignty.

Southern leaders said so, at the time,   over and over.

They would also kill others, in other places.

Lawrence Kansas would be attacked three times -- once on the day Atchison made  his speech about killing, and twice later, because they fought back against Atchison.


David Rice Atchison, US Senator, who helped Stephen A Douglas  pass the Kansas Nebraska Bill in 1854.

Atchison helped pass Kansas Nebraska bill, claiming he was just for "local control" and wanted to give the right to vote on slavery, to those in Kansas.

Atchison and Douglas refused to write into the Kansas bill any language that people could vote against slavery.

This is of monumental importance, Lincoln spoke of it often.  He spoke of it in House Divided Speech specifically.

You can not make head or tails out of LIncoln Douglas debates, or the House Divided speech, unless you know this.  This duplicity -- fraud -- of passing the Kansas bill to give people the right to vote on slavery, but it prevented them, as you will see, from voting AGAINST slavery.

In fact, that is exactly what Atchison did. Remember, he is the guy, personally, that got Kansas Nebraska bill passed.

Atchiton is the guy, personally, that refused any language in the bill to  say people can vote AGAINST slavery to keep it out. 

Atchison is the guy, personally, that left the US Senate, went to Kansas, and set up the bogus legislature, that made it a crime to speak against slavery.

Did you know that? HELL NO.  No one told you.  But this was common knowledge at the time. It's not some minor point, it shows a deliberate plan (Lincoln called it "machinery" to spread slavery).

Then Atchison personally led the killing sprees, and bragged about it.

If you followed this, this far, you know more than most history teachers even suspect, because this is NOT in any US text book, that we know of.

Almost everyone in Kansas was against slavery, as you will see, by votes later.

 Didn't matter, because the way Atchison and the killers he hired made sure, you could not vote against slavery. Hell, you couldn't even speak against slavery.

Atchison declared HE and his men controlled Kansas, and he did, per Jefferson Davis orders that Atchison was "General of Law and Order" in Kansas.

Atchison set up his own legislature, forever after called "the bogus legislature"  and passed laws stopping people from even speaking or writing publicly against slavery.

Jefferson Davis  forever justified Atchison's actions as "Constitutionally required".




You learn about it -- in Orwellian terms, like "The trouble in Kansas"   or as some idiot said the other day "the Kansas problem".

Trouble?  Problem?   Orwell much? 

   Atchison was in Kansas, killing to spread slavery.  He had the support of the "present administration".    When Kansas farmers naively appealed to Jefferson Davis and President Pierce for help -- rather than help them, these leaders labelled them a traitors and had them arrested  -- or killed -- by ATCHISON.

This is why Kansas whites faced such threats -- the US Army was in the hands of Jefferson Davis, as Secretary of War.

Davis would not use regular US troops for the killing sprees -- but Atchison solved that problem by getting the men from Texas.

The way your history text  books lays this out, it's as if the "trouble" fell from the sky, and no one was to blame, other than the radical abolitionist.

It is NOT just this speech at the time -- Atchison and his friends said and wrote things like this before and after this speech, though not quite so proudly and candidly.

Sound like state's rights to you?


Atchison brought Lincoln back into politics -- for his killing sprees, and his Kansas Nebraska bill.  Lincoln called the Kansas Nebraska act "part of the machinery" to force slavery into Kansas and beyond.  And he was right. 


Proudest day of his life?
That's what he said.

Killing to spread slavery?   

That's what he said.

Hired men from Texas, to do the will of the "South" by killing people in Kansas?

That's what he said.

Paid to create WAR on "the center of the country"
That's what he said.

With approval of the "present administration"?
That's what he said.

The killers could keep their loot and would be well paid?
That's what he said.

They would kill to silence opposition to slavery?
That's what he said.

He hated the United States and proudly rode under the red (Confederate) flag to show he would spill blood?

That's what he said.


Sound like he was for states rights?

Seriously -- does the US Senator, working for Jefferson Davis, sound like he was for state's rights?

At the time of these killings, 90% or more of the white men in Kansas voted AGAINST slavery.   



Remember this -- Jefferson Davis not only hired Atchison, not only named him "General of Law and Order" in Kansas Territory, but forerver defended Atchison.

Davis was killing in 1856- - and in 1861, demanded the spread of slavery into Kansas again, as a "war ultimatum" according to Southern papers (boasting of it).  You didn't hear about the Five Ultimatums issued by Davis and the Confederate leadership before the Civil War?   Of course not.  

Davis -- even after Kansas was admitted as a free state, in 1861, issued war ultimatums in May of 1861, that Kansas "must accept and respect slavery".

After, really, remember that, AFTER, Kansas was part of the US, as Confederate leader, Davis demanded that Kansas accept slavery.  Even AFTER he knew the white males voted over and over against slavery.

Even AFTER the Civil War, in his own book, Davis would claim that "the intolerable grievance"  that led to the war was the resistance to slavery in Kansas.

Kansas had no right to keep slavery out, Davis said, because blacks were "so inferior" they were not persons under the law, but property.  He cited the Dred Scott decision, to justify Atchison's killing sprees in Kansas, even though Atchison's first killing spree was a year BEFORE Dred Scott decision.

 SO the next time your history teachers says a damn word about Davis caring for states rights, hit the stupid bastard right in the mouth.

And Stephen DOuglas helped them -- yeah, the guy you were taught was for popular sovereignty, was helping these bastards behind the scene.

And no, you history teacher  doesn't know that either --it's not in text books. They only tell you what's in the text books.

Jefferson Davis said -- in his own book written after the Civil War -- that the resistance to the SPREAD of slavery into Kansas, was the "intolerable grievance".

Davis would demand the spread of slavery before, during, and after the Civil War. 

And yes, Davis knew 90% of the voters (and more) in Kansas were against slavery.  That did not make any difference to Davis.   Davis "logic" was that blacks are not human beings, under the law, but property.  As property, it did not matter what 90 or even 100% of the people in Kansas wanted or voted.   Dred Scott decision mandated blacks be seen as property, not human beings.   See more on this below.

Lincoln agreed that the SPREAD of slavery was the issue.   Lincoln said slavery was like a cancer, first it had to be stopped from spreading.   He had no authority, nor did the public care, to stop slavery where it already was.

But Lincoln was not about to allow Atchison and Davis to spread slavery into Kansas by force.

In fact, Lincoln bent over backward, to agree to anything EXCEPT the spread of slavery.  Lincoln said slavery would devour itself, if it could not spread.

And SOuthern leaders said the same basic thing -- if we do not spread slavery, the white race will be "exterminated" said Robert Toombs, in speech after speech, and in his own book, written at the time.

Atchison was outspoken -- not so much on the floor of the US Senate, when he and Stephen A Douglass pushed through Kansas Nebraska Bill.    But in Kansas, he could be blunt as hell.

This was not the only time Atchison bragged of killing -- he said if this didn't work, he would get 5,000 men, come back, and kill "every damn abolitionist in the territories".

Keep in mind -- Kansas whites voted against slavery time, and time again, and Atchison knew very well most folks there were against slavery.  Don't forget that, because you are taught by stupid people that there was some kind of "disagreement"  or "problem" in Kansas, where the two groups were "unable to reach an agreement.

Orwell much? Atchison was killing to spread slavery, and killing to stop people from speaking against slavery.   Your history teacher wants to make it seem complicated -- no, it wasn't. The excuses are complicated. 

Kind of refreshing, because others used Orwellian double speak to justify or say much the same thing.

"For the South and the present administration, we take the war into the center of the country"   



Difference between an excuse -- vs -- reason.

This may be over the head of most "history teachers"  but there is a difference between what lying bastards claim to be the reason, in public(we just love popular sovereignty) and what the same lying bastards boast about, in private.(kill to stop popular sovereignty). 

As stupid as it seems -- and is -- most "historians"  who write about Davis and Douglas, don't seem to grasp this.   They ignore the speeches and documents and letters that show these guys were doing all they could, including killing, to spread slavery.

Lincoln knew -- so did most people in the North at the time.  Read the Northern newspapers, at the time.  Read the "Crimes Against Kansas" speech.

Southern newspapers were justifying the killings --and claimed no one could stop "their rights" in the territories, which was Orwell speak for pushing slavery into Kansas and beyond.

SO it's no secret.   Why are your "history teachers" so stupid about this?

Because text books have glossed over this. And that's all they know -- text books.

Yes, Atchison, Davis, other Southern leaders could and did give the most amazing bullshit excuses,  and make stupid people weep with their supposed love of "popular sovereignty and "local control of local institutions".

Stupidly, historians are often too stupid to grasp, men are often motivated by, and do things for, power money and status.  In Douglas's case, they don't seem to know or care about his role in KS killings.   They go by his manipulative speeches in front of crowds in Illinois.


Atchison's goal, and he tells his men in bombast terms what his goal is, is to spread slavery, and silence opposition to it, by force.     Does that sound like he was for "state's rights".  

Atchison was "General of Law and Order" in Kansas, during these killings. He used men, mostly from Texas, to do the killings.   He and his men were paid by the Secretary of War.

Stephen A Douglas back stage role in Kansas Killings.

Idiotically, Stephen A Douglas is shown today as the "champion" of popular sovereignty.  Actually he was more vile that Jefferson Davis.

Stephen A Douglas, as Lincoln well knew, but your history teacher does not, got the Kansas Nebraska bill passed in exchange for Southern support for a railroad line west that would make Douglas very wealthy.

It was Douglas who helped push through the 1850 "great compromise" -- but four years later, Douglas -- with Atchison-- rejected the compromise of 1850.  See at bottom of this page, why Douglas was arguably the worse son of a bitch in US history,  and more than even Jefferson Davis himself, pushed the country to war. 


Actually, Atchison's speech should be read aloud to every history class in the USA, as well as Jefferson's Davis demands to spread slavery in Kansas, even after Kansas fought and voted 95% against slavery.

If there is a more important speech of the 1850's,other than Lincoln's,  I don't know what it is.

  And it's not just this speech, Atchison and his supporters wrote all kinds of things about spreading slavery into Kansas for God, and white superiority, for example.  

You thought it was about state's rights, didn't ya?  Your history teachers told you that, didn't they?

  No -- Southern leader hated states rights, when Kansas tried to keep slavery out.  Try to grasp that.  State's rights was always their excuse to spread slavery --because it sounded better.  

Southern leader US Senator David Rice Atchison  said the most joyous day of his life, was when he could kill to spread slavery.

"For the South and the present administration, we take the war into the center of the country"   

FOR THE SOUTH.  Remember that, that is what he said- - FOR THE SOUTH.  

Not for state's rights.  FOR THE SOUTH, and the those who believe in slavery!  That is what he said.  So don't give me this state's rights crap.  

Southern leaders hated state's rights, when state's rejected slavery, and killed to stop it. 

No one disputes this is Davis Rice Atchison speech, nor that he did exactly what he was bragged about -- kill to spread slavery. And kill for the SOUTH, with the approval of, direction of "the present administration".

Nor does anyone dispute he worked for Jefferson Davis. In fact, this speech is all but ignored. Ironically a high school teacher, found the speech, from the Kansas Historical Society web site.

And this was common knowledge at the time,  as you will see.  Newspapers at the time are filled with stories of what happened in Kansas, with New York papers getting the news out in a day or two.

Even some college text books act as if  the "Trouble in Kansas"  fell from the sky, and John Brown caused it.

Brown never even went to Kansas  until AFTER the killing sprees started, AFTER his brother was killed there by Atchison's men, and AFTER his son's appealed to him for help.

As Civil War grew closer, others in the South got more candid, like Alexander Stephens in Cornerstone speech.


Some of the "DAMN DOGS"   Atchison wanted killed, got away -- here is a picture of the surviving dogs, in 1890.

IN 1890

"We will continue to lynch, hang, tar and feather, drown every white livered abolitionist who dares pollute our soil "

Jefferson Davis paid for the killers --and later justified his efforts to spread slavery into Kansas, though in repeated votes, 95%+ of white males voted against slavery in Kansas.

Bet you didn't know that either.   

It would take a while for Kansas white males to get guns, and fight back.   But they did -- certain men left Atchison, like the early governor of KS, named by Jeff Davis, when he saw the killings were about one thing -- to spread slavery by force, into Kansas, the people of which were clearly and overwhelmingly anti slavery.

1)  Atchison made it illegal to speak or write against slavery.  Yes he did.  So when Atchison arrested, terrorized, and then killed people who were still speaking against slavery -- he did have an Orwellian logic -- he had told them not to.

See that in his speech.   He specifically said he was killing to stop them from speaking.  Read it again if you need to.  

So if Kansas folks continued to speak and worse, publish a newspaper against slavery, to him, they were worthy of death -- in his eyes.  Course, his eyesight was a little slanted, given he was paid and rewarded for these killings. 

This might sound extreme -- surely it cant be this way. Or else you would have heard, right?

Well you DID hear, a sanitized, almost fact free, version of this "Trouble in Kansas"  but thats white washed, it gives the false impression  were mean old Kansas abolitionists, and extremist on both sides, like John Brown,  and by golly, those guys just didn't get along.

Actually John Brown responded to the killings, tortures, and promise of more killings, by guys like Atchison.  Brown didn't even go to Kansas till AFTER  Davis and Atchison's killing sprees started.

Try to grasp that.

There was rapid increase in whites moving to Kansas, almost all of them anti slavery.  in fact, there were only 2 slaves in the entire state of Kansas, according to census in 1860.

There was NOT a group of slave owners in Kansas who wanted to spread slavery there.  There were a group of armed men, hired by Jeff Davis and David Rice Atchison, who wanted to spread slavery.   

That's a basic fact no text book in the US mentions.   Sadly text books give the opposite impression, that it was "extremist" on both sides -- because that is what they heard.

  Southern leaders wanted Kansas as a slave state -- and the rest of the West -- as slave states, all the way to California.

And they were eager  -- especially Jeff Davis -- to kill to do that. Sound like state's rights to you?

Who wanted these killings?  Atchison tells us -- the "present administration" -- which were President Pierce and Jefferson Davis, his only two superiors. They, and they alone, are who Atchison worked for.  He did not work for the US Army.  

Atchison's men tortured some victims, before they killed them.  And your history teacher "forgot" to mention that too.  Not that Atchison was in on, as far as we know, the tortures --but his men were paid killers. What do you expect?   Choirboys?

The people in Kansas tried to get President Pierce to help -- tried to get Jefferson Davis to help.  But those two had sent Atchison to Kansas.  

Your history teacher also has no clue, that Stephen A Douglas, supposedly Mr. Popular Soverighty, was actively helping Atchison and Jeff Davis by refusing to submit documents from Kansas that would have made Kansas a free state already.  Douglas and Atchison conspired to get the "bogus legislature" paperwork in first.

Later, being the scum bucket he was, Douglas first backed the bogus legislature, then when public opinion went against him, reversed course and was against the bogus legislature, which he personally had helped.  

Go on -- read his speech, he tells you who he killed, and why he killed them.

That's pretty good "history"  - who killed who, and why. 

Atchison bragged he was killing those who dared to speak against slavery -- and promised to kill more.    Atchison told the men who paid them, promised them very good pay, and even told them they could keep whatever they stole from houses they looted. 

Quite the speech.  

Not the Orwellian double talk of a politician like Davis -- but the fire&brimstone speech to men hired to kill.  

 It's obvious from the speech that Atchison never met most of these men before. and more clear that they were NOT from Kansas. He said where they are from  -- TEXAS.

He said they will be will paid -- and can keep the loot they steal.

He said what their goal was -- to kill and forever annihilate the "damn dogs" who were against slavery.  

Atchison brought Texas men to Kansas for one purpose -- to kill, terrorize, and frighten the survivors.  He said so, he was proud of that. 

Sound like state's rights to you?   When Kansas finally had elections, 95% voted against slavery in one election, 98% in another.

Why didn't Atchison and Davis just use the US Army, or local men, for the killing sprees?

Because the US Army would not kill for Davis.   They did - at his orders -- break up a legitimate group of men trying to form a legitimate government, but the Army would not kill those men for meeting.   Atchison's men would kill, and terrorize.

Also, there were simply not enough men in or even near Kansas that would kill for Jeff Davis and David Atchison, for money or not.


Do you know how Jeff Davis justified -- later -- the killings in Kansas? No, you don't.  Lincoln knew, most of the US knew, but somehow, this has been glossed over in US narrative of Kansas and the Civil War.

The Dred Scott decision --  that blacks were not human beings (not persons)  and that the federal government must  protect slavery.By what right did Jeff Davis have to arm and pay 1700 men from Texas to invade Kansas anyway? 

  Actually in 1856, they used the "right" of Atchison's own "laws"  from his own "bogus legislature".  But that wasn't enough.

  A  year later, they would use the Dred Scott decision.   

Push had come to shove -- and the Taney Court had to "settle the dispute" so no amount of votes in Kansas could keep slavery out.

The Dred Scott decision ordered-- yes ordered-- the federal government to "protect it" -- protect slavery.   This is from the Dred Scott decision. Shame on every "history" teacher you ever had, that did not tell you. 

Blacks not persons -- blacks are property. See for yourself.  Go on, see.  This is from the order -- not the "dicta" . This language is in the COURT ORDER.

Bet you didn't know that.

  Bet your history teacher never told you the US Supreme Court -- literally (we show you) pledged the US government to protect slavery -- never mind that 98% of people in Kansas opposed slavery, the Taney court PLEDGED the government to protect slavery in Kansas.

BLACK S so inferior they were not persons, but property.

Davis used this too -- to claim, with some justification, that the SCOTUS ordered slavery protected.   Still, that was a year AFTER Davis and Atchison got the killings in Kansas going.   Dred Scott came out March 1857,  Atchison and Davis were killing from 1855 on.

Only when Atchison and Davis failed to get slavery into Kansas, did Davis and his friend Roger Taney then use the Dred Scott decision to do by fraud and vile use of the courts, what they could NOT do by killing.   Remember that, cause your history teacher sure as hell does not know.

REPEAT     Dred Scott decision "pledged,"  aka ordered,  the federal government to "protect" slavery, even though in Kansas 98% of the people there were against slavery.

Here it is again.  This is from the actual decision.  Remember that. 

Seriously, blacks are NOT PERSONS?  

Officially, by decree -- of the United States Supreme Court blacks are NOT PERSONS BUT ARE PROPERTY

And you never heard that -- did you?    Hell no.   

Yet Lincoln shouted out the injustice and horror of this decision -- because it said blacks were NOT PERSONS.  

So why -- please tell me why -- the fuck we are not taught this in history class?

Please -- does anyone know?  We are NOT taught the ugly truths about Southern leaders-- not about Davis, not about Roger Taney, not about David Atchison.  

Is your history teachers stupid?  No -- but history teachers are paid to repeat narratives -- they are not paid to think or look at original sources.   This whitewashing of US history is an affront to the people who died as a result of he killing to spread slavery.  Some of what we learn is not history at all, but based the myths Southern school boards don't object to.

It goes beyond Southern School boards, however.  Mainstream historians, like supposed Lincoln expert Eric Foner - idiotically -- says Dred Scott was a "rather narrow ruling" about citizenship.  Fucking idiot.  Really, he is a fucking idiot. 

Narrow ruling?   A ruling that ordered the federal government to see blacks as not humans?  The ruling said nine different ways blacks are so inferior they are property, and then ORDERED the government to protect slavery, despite overwhelming votes and pubic rejection of slavery. How the hell is that a narrow ruling?   

That's narrow?  Either Foner is an idiot, a liar, or he never read the decision -- which is probably the case. Seriously, he would not the first "historian" to not bother to read the document he it telling others about. Foner would have to read it, because this part of the decision, where Taney orders blacks to be seens as property, not persons, is not mentioned in most text books. And the parts -- 9 times -- claiming blacks are inferior beings, that too is not mentioned in text books. Foner apparently reads texts books, regurgitates them, acts like he is some kind of historian. He isn't any more a historian as anyone else who relies on text books for his material.

Narrow ruling -- sure as hell Davis bragged otherwise -- and used that logic to kill, and keep killing.How is that narrow?

Idiotically, Foner specifically gets it wrong, saying Dred Scott prohibited Congress from outlawing slavery in Kansas.  Fucking hell - the Dred Scott decision ORDERED blacks to be seen as non human -- as property.

How does Foner miss that? It's IN THE FUCKING DECISION. 

And Davis bragged out the ass about it. And LIncoln exposed it.  How do you miss that?  Foner did.

And the SAME part of that order, declared the federal government will PROTECT SLAVERY --  not just in Kansas, but everywhere. Kansas was not an issue in DS.   The Court did not say "Just in Kansas".  Everywhere -- remember that - everywhere in US was the jurisdiction of the Taney Court.   SO it's fucking important what they said and what they specifically ruled.

And Foner gets that wrong? No wonder so many history teachers don't know their ass from a banana on this -- either do the supposed "experts". 


But finally people fought back.  One of them was John Brown.

That's why Atchison had to hire -- pay - Texas men, and he speaks to them in the speech, glorifies them, tells them they are fighting for the SOUTH under a red flag to denote blood they will spill.

What is a US Senator doing with foreign troops, under the pay and orders of the Secretary of War?   They were doing exactly what David Rice Atchison was telling, and paying, them to do. Kill and terrorize.

You can make that complicated if you want, but it's actually simple.  Atchison and Davis were killing in Kansas, right after Atchison and Stephen A Douglas got the Kansas Nebraska Bill passed.

Want to give your "history teacher" a test -- ask him what role David Rice Atchison played in Kansas.   It's likely he won't even know who Atchison is, in relation to Kansas,  but if he does know, he won't know Atchison was hired by Jeff Davis to kill people who dared to speak and try to vote, against slavery. That is just not taught in US schools. 

THere were very very few slaves in Kansas -- in fact, only 2 slaves in the entire state of Kansas according to the census.  

Your "history" teacher won't know this -- but there  was NOT a group of slave owners who wanted Kansas as a slave state. 

This was a few lunatics who wanted very badly for Kansas to be a slave state, even though 90% of the people there wanted to be a free state.   Sadly, your text books give the impression there were two sides of "extremists"  -- bullshit.

There were the Kansas farmers who wanted to be free -- and yes, EVENTUALLY they fought back.  But the killing sprees came first, a basic fact your history teachers is unaware of.  It took a while for Kansas farmers to fight back.

John Brown's sons started to fight back, and John Brown's brother was killed by Atchison's men.  John Brown went to Kansas and started fighting back.   The way this is presented in most text books, is some crazy guy (John Brown) started killing.   He did kill -- after several killing sprees by Atchison, yes.  And if he did NOT fight back, the history of the US would have been drastically different.  

The killing sprees would have worked, if not for men like John Brown. 

Remember that too. 

No one disputes this is his speech, nor that he led these men into Kansas to do exactly as he said -- kill to spread slavery.  He tried his best, he just could not kill them all.

It took about a year, but Kansas men finally fought back effectively, against Atchison, and Davis paid thugs. Then, like most cowards who urge others to kill and die --Atchison ran away from the fight.  The  US Senator who was so brave when urging others to kill and die -- ran back to Texas, when he couldnt outnumber his victims 10 or 100 to 1.   


"You heard of it, but in a whitewashed way, as "Trouble in Kansas" -- an Orwellian way to describe paid killing sprees to stop speech against slavery."

  "Southern school boards have never allowed the ugly truth in text books, like the speech about  1700 killers in Kansas, paid by Jefferson Davis to kill people who voted and spoke against slavery.."
Bet you never heard about the killing sprees to spread slavery -- led by former US Senator, paid for by Jeff Davis as Secretary of War.

So why --we want to know why -- are the bragging about the killings, and the killings themselves -- not mentioned in an honest way in US text books?  

Davis BOASTED, in that smooth double talk, that blacks were "inferior beings" and ordained by God to be enslaved.   He BOASTED that it was proper to force slavery into Kansas, despite votes of 98% against slavery in Kansas, and he used the Dred Scott decision to justify it.

Yet, even before Dred Scott decision, Davis was killing in Kansas - via hired killers -- to stop people from even speaking against slavery.  Yes, he was, as you will see.   So as vile as Dred Scott decision was, Davis used that after his paid killers were already killing. 

Why not explain that in our US text books?

Good question. We answer that, after the speech by David Rice Atchison, about his killing sprees. 

According to Jefferson Davis -- it did not matter if 95% of the people in Kansas were against slavery.   Did you read his book about it? I bet you didn't. 

But Davis had an excuse for that --did you know how Davis justified spreading slavery into Kansas?  He justified it, in his own book "Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government.  

Southern apologist still today quote Davis on "State's RIghts"  and never dare deal with Davis killing to PREVENT state's rights. Hell, Davis killed to prevent free speech-- he sure as hell didn't care about state's rights.

 Did  Davis know KS  whites rejected slavery overwhelmingly? HELL YES he knew. That's why he sent the killers, that's why he sent Atchison -- because he knew!

 Later, Davis would claim he was simply doing "what the Constitution required".   

Davis -- in his own book -- Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government -- explained his view (his excuse actually) on why the South could demand the spread of slavery into Kansas, even when 90% or more of the people there voted against it, and even when the people in Kansas fought a bloody war for years -- against the killers Davis sent.

Remember -- this is from Davis own book. He wrote this.   It's in his own book.

BECAUSE blacks were not human beings, they were property.  Don't blame me for that --and are not "part of the people".  

That's what Taney had written -- in the Dred Scott decision.  

Indeed, Davis was right -in that his buddy Roger Taney wrote that blacks are NOT persons for purposes of the US Constitution.

Davis boasted of the Dred Scott decision -- and he boasted of it, because it really did say blacks are inferior beings, and it really did claim blacks are not persons, but property.

You are not taught that either. 

Slaves are PROPERTY -- not human beings.   Not persons,   Taney actually wrote the words NOT PERSONS.

According to Davis -- slaves were not human beings -- not persons.  They were "inferior beings" because the Supreme Court of the United States said so -- really.  And Davis had a point -- that is indeed what the US Supreme Court ruled.

Taney wrote -- "The Constitution of the United States [hereby] recognizes slaves as property -- and pledges the Federal Government to protect it.

HERE THAT IS -- this is from the order of the court.   This is a jpeg from the order, this is NOT someone giving their opinion, this is the decision ITSELF.

Bet you didn't know the SCOTUS said blacks were inferior beings, did you? Hell no, they don't teach that.

Killing  people who spoke against slavery?   You mean a US Senator and Jefferson Davis had people killed for speaking against slavery? Uh -- exactly.


And Atchison was not some nut working alone -- as you will see, he was funded by Jefferson Davis, who was then Secretary of War for the US. 

Nor was this an isolated series of events -- this was the basic push, vs the basic shove.   Davis and Southern leaders decided Kansas would be their killing ground, to push slavery there by force, because Davis himself controlled the US Army, as Secretary of War.

What Davis could not get done by the US Army, he would get done by his paid killers, from Texas.  

Davis killers -- hired by Atchison -- were an illegal army of 1700 men, from Texas, flying under a foreign flag, paid by Jefferson Davis as Secretary of War, led by a US Senator. 

 Sounds preposterous, right?

Only preposterous because you have never learned, nor did your history teacher, some of the ugly violent "details" of Southern leaders rabid efforts to spread slavery.

It was common knowledge at the time.   

Atchison's speech fit  nicely with his other comments at the time, and perfectly with his own supporters statements.   Remember that -- no one, not Jefferson Davis, not Atchison, not Atchison's supporters, claim he did not say or do what he said in the speech.

It's  just that this speech has largely been glossed over -- yet it's a gold mine of who paid the killers, where the killers were from, and why and who they killed.


Atchison and his buddies in Kansas were not shy -- they were loud and proud -- they were trying to scare the shit out of 10,000 Kansas farmers, and the louder they were, the more extreme the speech, they hoped to kill enough, but  scare the rest.

That's a definition of terrorism -- and Atchison was no less a terrorist because he was paid by Jefferson Davis.

Luckily the original transcript of his speech still exists. 

  Furthermore, newspapers in Kansas reported Atchison's killings, and the bragging of other involved, like this. The newspaper clip below, is a quote from Atchison's right hand man, he too, bragging of killing, and for the same reason.

WE will continue to lynch hang,.... drown .... every abolitionist who dares pollute our soil."

For killers -- these guys were honest.  Unlike politicians, like Davis, who could make stupid people believe killing to spread slavery, and slavery itself, was ordained by God and the Constitution.

But then, remember this,  Atchison and the other killers were trying to terrorize -- scare the crap out of most of the farmers, kill who resisted.  And as you will see, they had the "authorities" on their side, in Washington. 

The killers did not fear the US Army -- because the guy who led the US Army was Secretary of War, and he was the guy who PAID Atchison and these men.     


Davis had sent the Army to disperse Kansas farmers trying to form a state government -- but those soldiers would not do what Atchison's killers would -- kill.

Remember that.  Davis did use the US Army as much as he could, but the US Army would not actually kill people for speaking against slavery -- that is why Atchison had to get men from Texas, and pay them.   They were NOT regular troops, they wore no uniform, and they rode under the Confederate flag, and Texas flag -- as you can tell from the speech. 

Your "history" teacher has no clue of any of that.    It's astonishing, really, how stupid most "history" teachers are about this aspect of the Civil War -- the violent spread of slavery, by killers, who were financed by Jefferson Davis when he was Secretary of War.

So your teacher would also not know about Davis defense of killings in Kansas -- and his defense was the Dred Scott decision, never mind that it came out AFTER  the killing sprees started. So your teacher would miss that too. 

  It took the Civil War to stop this shit -- and Lawrence was attacked repeatedly during the Civil War, eventually burned to the grown, and all men who resisted, and caught, were killed. 



The original is in the vault  at Kansas Historical Society.  
The speech looks like this.  CLICK TO SEE SPEECH @ KS HISTORY SITE     

Southern leaders KILLED to spread slavery, and spent a lot of money, time and effort, for years to spread slavery into Kansas. 

And they BRAGGED of it.   Out the ass, in public, and for years.

It wasn't a secret -- to anyone.  It might SEEM like a secret now,  because the killing sprees to spread slavery are not mentioned in our US text books -- at least, not in a candid way.

And the speeches by the killers themselves, you will not find in any US text book.

 From 1854, all the way up to, and then through, the US CIvil War, Jefferson Davis himself was obsessed -- as you will see -- with spreading slavery into Kansas. Even after the war, for the rest of his life, he insisted slavery should have been forced into Kansas, as he claimed slavery was, by decree of the United States Surpreme Court, a "protected right" and the federal government, under Lincoln, should have protected slavery in Kansas, even AFTER Kansas whites voted again, and again, and again, to reject slavery.

Davis was a lunatic about spreading slavery -- see his actions, and his words, below.

Remember this -- Davis insisted Kansas whites had no right to reject slavery.   Don't believe that bullshit about Davis defending states rights -- he hated states rights when Kansas rejected slavery.

Even though, as you will also see, 98% of the white males in Kansas were against slavery.

Of course,  this is contrary to the narrative (a bullshit narrative) that Southern leaders cared about state's rights. 

Your text books always mention bullshit about "state's rights".  Actually, Southern leaders hated states rights when a state rejected slavery, and killed -- as you see above -- to STOP state's rights.

Don't believe that crap about Southern leaders concern for state's rights -- it was a lie then, and is a lie now.  Jeff Davis and other leaders actually killed to SUPRESS  state's rights.  Don't let history teacher get away with the nonsense about "many reasons" for civil war, and a "difference of opinion" about state's rights.

 Actions speak louder than words, particularly murder, killing, at terrorizing actions.  It's disgusting that we are given boooshit in our text books

   Yes, Southern leaders used words -- the bastards were word smiths, smooth lying bastards.   But they terrorized, killed, and BRAGGED of killing at the time -- when people in Kansas rejected slavery. Don't forget that.

    Nor was it "one or two extremist" who did the killing. Jeff Davis sent Atchison to Kansas, to do exactly that -- to kill to spread slavery.

Yes, US Senator David Atchison, in 1856, had 1700 men, hired mostly from Texas, killing and terrorizing folks in Kansas.

Bet your history teacher "forgot" to tell you.  If your teacher told much, they likely used the narrative to "Trouble in Kansas"  or "Border Wars".

That narrative -- as you will see -- is nearly Orwellian nonsense.   This was not "trouble" ;  this was a well financed killing spree by a US Senator and later Confederate general, that lasted for nine years. 

Nor was this a "Border" dispute.  As Atchison bragged of, this was about the spread of slavery.  He didn't say a damn word about borders, but he said a lot of words about killing to terrorize and spread slavery. 

Another bit of misdirection -- you might have heard of "Border Ruffians".    Yes they were called that.   But the connotation of that term now, is some midly aggressive folks.

No, these were killers -- and they were hired for that purpose.  You can see for yourself how Atchison makes that clear in his speech to those killers

Atchison's speeches tells you who they would kill, who paid them, and why -- and he was bragging of it.

Who killed who-- and why.  By a man that was doing the killing -- not bad for real history.

This is not some new finding -- everyone  knew this at the time -- as you will see, from Charles Sumner's "Crimes Against Kansas Speech" delivered the day BEFORE this particular killing spree. 

Bet your history teacher will say he/ she knows "all about" Crimes Against Kansas" speech.   But I bet he/she can't tell you what it was about .

Sadly, the "who killed who" and "why" part of these killing sprees has been replaced by the narrative we showed above -- double talk about "conflict" and essentially saying both  sides were "extremists".

Bullshit. The killers were all hired-- and paid.   They were paid by Jeff Davis.  They were led by David Rice Atchison.  They killed people who even SPOKE against slavery.

That whole bullshit narrative about "extremist" on both sides is almost as vile as the killings themselves.    Yes, finally, people DID fight back -- of course.  They had to fight back or move out of Kansas.  Many of them did die

You can easily be fooled if you don't know that facts. 

Unless you learn of the ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS 

  Even before Sumner was beaten almost to death, on the Senate floor no less, the killing and oppression in Kansas was well known.

Atchison's  Lawrence killings was a whole new level of killing -- because for the first time, as you will see in his speech, he is using killers from Texas.   These killers did not go away, some of them stayed up to and through the US Civil War.

And just like Atchison focused on Lawrence Kansas, the killers he brought up from Texas, also focused on Lawrence during the Civil War. These guys were real, real pissed, that people in Lawrence stood up to them.

That's another thing you history teacher likely doesn't know.

Point is --  Atchison was loud and proud of it, as you will see in his speech.  

Yeah, Atchison gave a proud speech about the killings -and he had already killed.  This was not his first killing, nor would it be his last.  This is the one we have his speech about.


Ironically -- and pathetically - Jefferson Davis was so good at Orwellian bullshit, his words (carefully selected) still fool stupid people today, even though some consider themselves "history teachers". 

This is as basic as it gets-- this is not "out of context" or some nut on his own.  This is US Senator, working with Jefferson Davis, then Secretary of War, to kill folks who just spoke against slavery in Kansas.


Remember -- as you can see from his speech -- Atchison used men from Texas to terrorize and kill the men in Kansas. 

Why?  To spread slavery.

 Why men from Texas?   Because he could not hire men from Kansas to do the killing.   Later votes in Kansas showed that 90% plus of white men in Kansas rejected slavery --  another tid bit your history teacher won't tell you, mostly because of stupidity.

Atchison never met the killers from Texas before this speech --as you can tell from the speech itself.  They were newly hired.

Although Atchison had hired some men from Missouri, there were not nearly enough to spread the terror necessary. 

Atchiton bragged to these men that they would be well paid, and that they rode under the Texas and Confederate flag -- that he hated the US flag, and that he was doing these killing for the "authorities" -- meaning Jefferson Davis, who had named Atchison General of Law and Order.

That's right -- Atchison boasted out the ass about what flag he rode under, when he killed.   And he detested the US flag -- yet he worked for the Secretary of War of he United States as he killed.  


This would surprise no one in 1856.  

In fact, Charles Sumner gave one of the most famous speeches in US history (your teacher will claim he knows "all"  this speech, but likely never read it) about Atchison and killing in Kansas. 

  Ironically, Sumner gave his speech about previous killings in Kansas   --- Sumner gave his speech  the day before Atchison invasion and massacre of Lawrence.   In other words, after Sumner was beaten almost to death on the Senate floor for exposing the crimes in Kansas, Atchison's most lethal killing sprees began, with the help of his newly hired Texas killers.   

"The Crimes Against Kansas" 

This was not even denied by Southern leaders in 1856-57-58. 

 Jefferson Davis would forever defend his actions (via Atchison) in Kansas.   Davis, of course, would not have given the honest speech pep-talk to kill.  Davis would have, and did, phrase his killing sprees in Orwellian double speak.

Also, Congressional hearings later, had testimony about Atchison's statements -- including other statements, like he would bring 5000 men back  next time, and kill everyone against slavery (apparently he was not happy with the results of his 1700 men).

Bet you didn't know the SCOTUS ordered slavery protected in Kansas, even though 95% plus votes against slavery there.  Hell no, they don't teach that.

It's not some conspiracy -- it's just the bullshit narrative that US text books and most history teachers stupidly repeat.  And repeat. And repeat.  


Lincoln exposed this vile "machinery"  as he called it -- go read in House Divided Speech.  Or any of the LIncoln Douglas debates -- this is what Lincoln was talking about.  



Atchison was a slave owner from Texas, who moved to Missouri and became US Senator, back when the public didn't vote for Senators -- the state legislature did. He was violent, crude, but honest about what he did. He said who he was going to kill, then he did. He explained why he was going to kill.

He did not mince words -- unlike his political bosses, who were word mincing experts, as you will see. 

Atchison is the guy who -- with Stephen A Douglas -- got Kansas Nebraska Bill passed. Doubtless your history teacher will pretend he knows "ALL" about that.  

Yet the guy that gets Kansas bill passed, rushes out to Kansas, raises an army from Texas, and invades Kansas, then  BRAGS about killing.   


Jefferson Davis gave glorious speeches about  "state's rights".  Idiotically, we are told in our text books, Southern leaders cared about state's rights -- because in speeches, that's what they SAID.

Well -- some speeches they said that, yes.  But in some speeches they bragged of killing to STOP states rights.    Why not learn about those speeches?

Yes -- it's ugly, it's violent -- but  why the  hell not learn about what the bastards DID?   

Seems our our text book "historians" are unable to deal with ACTIONS.  Eeasier to take a quote -- then pretend that speaker meant what they said.  Clue #1 in history -- people often use excuses -- to kill, to oppress, to enslave.   So study what they DO, not just their cute little for-publication speeches.

 This is especially true with slave owners. Why the hell do we just quote their lofty sounding BS?   Davis spoke about "state's rights" but his actions including killing to prevent state's rights. 

Stringfellow was Atchison's aide --

-- "we will continue to lynch, hang, tar and feather, drown every white livered abolitionist who dares pollute our soil "

As terrorist (Atchison and his killers were terrorists) WANTED people to know. They wanted Kansas farmers who apposed slavery dead, afraid, or gone, AND THEY SAID SO AND KILLED TO MAKE IT SO.

 Atchison, Davis, and all of them men insisted Kansas was theirs -- never mind that clearly the vast majority of white males in KS rejected slavery overwhelmingly.   

It would take a while for a few good men to fight back -- but fight back they did. 


Charles Sumner's famous "Crimes Against Kansas" speech,  named Atchison specifically --  and Sumner was beaten almost to death on the Senate floor, moments after the speech. Just like Atchison's main goal was to close newspapers and prevent speech against slavery, as you will see.
"The Crimes Against Kansas" 


Davis claimed local people could not decide the issue -- therefore, it did not matter what the people in Kansas wanted.   See much more about Davis "logic" below. 

The problem is, we do NOT teach from original documents --- especially the history of killing to spread slavery, that was the overarching reality of political and military life from 1800-1865.  


You MIGHT have heard about Charles Sumner being beaten on Senate floor -- but I bet you didn't grasp what he was beaten for.

He was beaten because he gave the "Crimes Against Kansas" speech --  exactly what David Atchison was bragging about, in his speech, Sumner was exposing on the Senate floor.  

So it's not like this is a "detail" -- or a temporary event, or the actions of one killer, or even one group of killers.  

This was an ongoing  effort by Southern leaders to spread slavery --by any means, including, proudly, killing to stop people from rejecting slavery in Kansas. 


The problem was the rhetoric -- the speeches, books and documents -- written by hate mongers, who could convince Southerners they were going to be killed -- really -- if slavery did not SPREAD. 

You heard right - Southern speakers, like Davis, Yancey, Toombs, A. Stephens, could get crowds cheering, chanting, bragging about their hate.   

It's no accident that the FIRST thing Davis and Confederate leaders did, still in Montgomery where they created the Confederacy, was to demand the SPREAD of slavery into Kansas. 

That was not the second, or third thing they did -- that was the FIRST thing they did.

It was not a side issue, then or before. 

No one was surprised -- literally no one -- that Southern leaders demanded the spread of slavery into Kansas.  New York papers the next day suggested Lincoln OBEY the Five Ultimatums, as SOuthern papers called them.

That's right SOUTHERN newspapers called these "The Five Ultimatums"  and the first two were about the spread of slavery into Kansas.  Keep in mind, Southern leaders knew very well that Kansas rejected slavery by war and by vote, the vote was 98% against slavery.

Yeah -- you heard about "popular sovereignty" and "states rights".

Try to grasp this -- those lovely sounding platitudes did not line up with the years of killing and terror in KS. You might be surprised to know, people ALWAYS have lovely sounding excuses and Orwellian double talk, when they kill, oppress, and enslave.

Stupidly, you are taught the platitudes uttered by men like Jefferson Davis and Stephen A Douglas.  Sadly, you are not taught about what they did.  Shame on the text books that push the bullshit, and don't even mention their actions. 

The SPREAD of slavery was a violent issue, just like slavery itself was based on violence.  The men who enslaved, tortured, whipped, and boasted God ordained it, were the same men who pushed for more slavery, more territory to have their slaves.  

Your history books never told you that simple fact.

Southern leaders promised violence again, and again for decades, over the same reason -- to spread slavery.


You probably heard about  the "Compromises" of 1820 and 1850  - but you didn't know they were compromises like a 7-11 robbery is a compromise.   Each time Southern leaders promised violence if they could not spread slavery. Each time they had enough power in Congress -- and slave owners or apologist in White House -- that they got what they wanted. 

Remember that.

White males in the North were racists too -- they sure as hell were not going to fight the Taliban of the day  (Confederate leaders) over black slavery.  Why bother?   

Lincoln's biggest problem would be  how to harness the energy and power of the North, to get rid of slavery.   Southern leaders made it impossible for Lincoln to ignore the spread of slavery - -in fact, before he even took office, Confederate leaders had killed, tortured, attacked. 

Lincoln was willing to do ANYTHING to keep the Union together, because the only way the South could spread slavery was to dissolve the Union.  The only way to push slavery any further, was to end any influence of the North.   Push had come to shove.

With Lincoln in office -- as Davis knew -- he would not allow Davis and other killers to roam free in Kansas or the West.  Up to Lincoln, Southern scum had their way, because they had control of the White House and the Army.  Davis himself was Secretary of War for the killing sprees in Kansas.

We have white washed all that -- the narrative we use in US text books is STILL to this day, controlled or heavily influenced by Southern school boards.  Really. 

There is no one alive today who, in the USA, learned in school the harsh and violent ongoing efforts to spread slavery -- including killing those who spoke against slavery.   Instead, we give boooshit about "many causes"  and "states rights"

Nonsense -- when Atchison was bragging about killing, he was clear --they killed to spread slavery. They killed to rid the "western world" of every god damn abolitionist -- by death if they had to.  He was there, he was being candid, we should listen to people like that. 



This is conjecture -- of course -- but if Davis and Atchison could have gotten slavery pushed into Kansas, and as they wanted, the rest of the West, there would be no need for them to secede.   As you will see, even in 1861, Confederate leaders were STILL demanding the spread of slavery into Kansas, as a war ultimatum.  (See below).

Once people in Kansas fought back, and once it was clear Davis could NOT push slavery by the technique he wanted (terror and the Dred Scott decision)   secession became inevitable.   Davis would need a full army to do what he wanted -- not just 1700 unreliable thugs from Texas that Atchison found. 

And Jeff Davis himself fairly said so -- Davis wrote, in his own book -- that the resistance to the SPREAD of slavery  in KANSAS was the "INTOLERABLE GRIEVANCE"   that made it necessary to secede. That -- and the supposed disregard for Dred Scott decision. 

See more about that, below.


In 1856 -- the difference was, interestingly -- the telegraph. You don't realize this, but by 1856 most  US  cities were "online" by telegraph. What happened in Kansas on Tuesday, was known in New York by Wednesday, and all over by Friday or the next week.

So when Atchison tortured and killed people in Lawrence, the next day or two, people all over knew something about it.   When Jeff Davis and Franklin Pierce defended killers -- using lofty language or not -- people knew what the hell was going on.

That's how Charles Sumner knew so much about the Kansas killings - those BEFORE Atchison went on his first large scale killing spree.  The "Crimes against Kansas Speech"  was the most famous speech leading up to the Civil War, other than Lincoln's House Divided Speech, which was about the same issue -- the spread of slavery by violence and fraud.  

So news about killings in Kansas -- the tortures, the arson, the promises of more killing -- got around.   Before that, when spreading slavery by violence before, no one could be sure what the hell was going on.  Slave power could do what they wanted, and no one could stop them, few could even know what went on.

 The violence, the killing, did not start in 1856,  slavery was itself a violent enterprise and always was - no matter what you saw in Gone With The Wind.

You need to understand -- slave owners  got their way by violence, by torture, by killing, or the threat of it.    They used the same mentality - and cruelty - in spreading slavery to more and more land.

 Even "moderates" like Lee regularly had slaves whipped (yes, he did    LEE CRUEL CLICK

Every new state coming into the Union was an epic battle of it's own -- and just like in KS, slave power used killing and violence to spread it.  Kansas folks, as stated, got the news out, even if they had to go to St. Louis or Quincy  to use the telegraph, they did.

Once any newspaper had the story -- it was also picked up by other papers, information flowed with astonishing speech, compared to all times of previous history.   The role of the telegraph, and how it helped defeat the spread of slavery, is a stunning topic, by itself. 

As ever new state came into the Union, slave vs free  nearly caused wars several times before the Civil War, with Southern leaders being more like the "American Taliban".  Southern leaders were feared, the slave owners were the violent bullies -- killing politicians, beating Sumner almost to death on the Senate floor.  

These guys -- the slave power folks - DID NOT BLUFF.  The leaders themselves were often cowards - but they did not back down. Davis would send - as you can see - 1700 killers to Kansas. He was  not about to back down from his promise of spread of slavery into Kansas. 

We have white washed this  80 years of violence  to spread that preceded the Civil War.  That should stop. 


Atchison  could not kill all the people against slavery --- as you will see, 98% of the people in Kansas in 1856 were against slavery.  Even with 1700 men, he could not kill 10,000 men.

Atchison was really a terrorist -- kill as many as you need to -- make it loud and proud, to frighten the rest.  And he was loud and proud about it.

When the people of Kansas kept speaking against slavery anyway, Atchison promised he would come back and kill them all -- with 5000 men. 

The terror Atchison used didn't work. It almost worked.  


As you can see, from Atchison's own speech, he was working for Jefferson Davis and Franklin Pierce, then US President. He tells his men that,  even brags that they (Pierce and Davis) and the "entire South" wants this war carried into Kansas!     

What war?  The Civil War is five years away. 

The point is, Atchison was not just some kook who liked to kill.   He was a US Senator, working for the Secretary of War. (Bet you can't guess who was Secretary of War was).

What the hell is the Secretary of War doing -- sending anyone to Kansas to kill, or even interfere, in Kansas politics?   According to Davis, later, he said he was doing what was "constitutionally required". 


AMAZING FACT: There were about 10,000 whites living in the entire Kansas Territory --over 98% of them are against slavery, as future votes will prove.  That's right -- Kansas whites were against slavery overwhelmingly.

They killed by hanging, drowning, torture, chopping people up, and shooting.   Remember they were proud of it -- they were paid for it. 

 These were not local men with a "difference of opinion" about slavery.  That's very important to know, because as you will see, stupidly US textbooks give the impression it was a local dispute of extremists. Bullshit. Yes, Kansas men fought back -- as soon as they could. But it took a while.


 Davis was US Secretary of War, in 1856. 
Davis named Atchison
"General of Law and Order" in Kansas



Photo of Abraham Lincoln

As Lincoln warned -- over and over  -- if Southern leaders could get slavery spread into Kansas (see the House Divided Speech)  then no state was safe.    Lincoln warned of the Davis
logic  that meant no matter what Kansas voters voted for, no matter what they did -- Southern leaders "logic" in spreading slavery to Kansas meant no state was safe.

You may think Lincoln was wrong about Davis wanting to spread slavery in all other states -- but he was not wrong  at all.  Davis boasted more than once he would spread slavery in the North too -- and in the West.

And yes, Davis knew well that people in Kansas rejected slavery overhwelmingly.

So by the "Davis logic" that states had no right to keep slavery out (see below)  it was not just about Kansas -- but about the entire US.   Lincoln was not being an alarmist --the killings were going on for years before he gave  his House Divided Speech.

And your history teacher will claim he knows about the House Divided speech. I bet he or she doesn't have a clue that LIncoln laid out exactly the plan for Davis and his buddies to spread slavery, against the will of the people.   That's what Lincoln's house Divided Speech was, an expose of the killings and "logic" of South pushing slavery, by force if need be, into KANSAS.

And of course -- he was right.  Southern leaders bragged loudly they would spread slavery where they wanted -- that the Dred Scott decision gave them the right.    


Southern leaders were using a "two prong" approach to spread slavery -- the Dred Scott decision, and killing.

Really. Those were the tools Southern leaders used -- Dred Scott decision, and killing.  Interestingly, Atchison's failure to kill enough people to make Kansas a slave state, very likely was  the reason Taney and Davis went so extreme in the language they used in Dred Scott case



Remember -- Kansas rejected slavery overwhelmingly when they finally got to vote.  Kansas entered the US as a free state in January of 1861, confirmed by Congress and the President, Buchanan.

Did even that stop Davis and South from demanding  slavery in Kansas? 

You never heard this, did you. After KS was admitted as a FREE STATE, even President Buchanan agreed to that, Congress passed it, Davis demanded Kansas accept and respect slavery anyway.

Davis never did relent and say "Oh, Kansas doesn't want slavery, okay, my bad, carry on".   Even 11 years later, when Davis wrote his book, he STILL claimed Kansas should have accepted and respected slavery, and said the resistance to slavery in Kansas was "the intolerable grievance".

Get your head around that. 

  Surprisingly, President Buchanan,  for once in his life (possibly his  hate of Douglas)  signed off on Kansas becoming a free state.

But STILL Southern leaders, especially Davis, STILL demand the spread of slavery into Kansas.  These guys are un -fucking -real. They are obsessed with pushing slavery into Kansas!

Did the Kansas voters rejecting slavery over and over, sink in, to Davis?

No - -for the rest of his life, Davis insisted Kansas should have been a slave state.  

 Did it matter that 90% and more voters rejected slavery again and again in Kansas?


In fact, Davis said the resistance to the spread of slavery into KANSAS was "intolerable".   This guy was one crazy piece of shit. 

THE TRUE ISSUE -- per southern newspapers, and documents and speeches at the time -- was the spread of slavery into Kansas.  That's not what we said -- that's what the Southern leaders said at the time.  

And that was in 1861 -- five years after Atchison was killing to do that, in 1856.  Remember that.

Why aren't you taught that?   The South was proud of  it then, bragged about it then, killed to spread slavery then.

Why are we not taught what they boasted of -- and did?

Seems Southern school boards keep this kind of factual truth out of our history books.  Can't offend anyone.

And our Southern friends love to pretend Southern leaders cared about state's rights -- can't show Jeff Davis role in killing people to stop state's rights, if you show them Davis Atchison's speech and actions. 


       Jefferson Davis and David Atchison wanted slavery IN Kansas.  

They got the help of Stephen A Douglas, to open Kansas up for slavery, in exchange for their support of railroad route that Douglas hoped would make him rich.

 When you hear about Douglas being for "popular sovereignty"  -- thats bullshit.   He helped his buddy (He and Atchison were close friends, Douglas insisted Atchison was "the kindest and most patriotic man I ever met) kill people in Kansas.    Douglas SPOKE about popular soverighty -- he never meant a word of it. 

BASIC  FACT: There were about 10,000 whites living in the entire Kansas Territory.  About  98% of them are against slavery, as future votes will prove.  A small but violent minority of people -- almost all from out of state --tried to push Kansas to be a slave state.



Henry Ward Beecher, the most famous abolitionist preacher of the day, called it correctly in 1856. If we allow the killers to prevail in Kansas, he essentially said, we will have Civil War all over.  Beecher wanted the killers stopped in Kansas, because that would stop the spread of slavery.

 But the killing never stopped in Kansas,  Southern leaders demanded the spread of slavery into Kansas as a war ultimatum, May of 1861.  The killing continued in Kansas all through the Civil War itself. 

Translation "Damn Dog" = people who dared to speak against slavery.


The usual way into Kansas at the time, for settlers, was the Missouri River.  But Atchison put sharpshooters on the river, and just shot anyone who tried to pass who was anti slavery

LANT TRAIL  A man named Laned created a Northern route, over land, with armed camps for people to sleep at night along the way, to protect them from Atchisons men.

Bet you didn't know that.  This article above, while true enough  fails to point out, that "pro-slavery" folks were NOT settlers, they were all hired.    


The Dred Scott decision came AFTER -- remember that -- AFTER the killings in Kansas started. AFTER Atchison hired the 1700 men, AFTER  Charles Sumner was almost killed on  Senate floor, AFTER Jeff Davis paid for the killers from Kansas, and AFTER Franklin Pierce and Stephen A Douglas helped the killers.

The Taney Court wanted to "settle forever"   the question of slavery -- and they did it while the killing was going on. Jefferson Davis could not have written the decision any more perfect to spread slavery.

In fact, it's possible, though conjecture, that Davis told Taney what words to use.

Not human beings    Not persons    But property
The Taney decision declared blacks to be "so inferior" they were not human beings but "inferior" beings -- specifically, by decree PROPERTY.  More about that below. 

You never heard this in your history class did you? 

Tell the truth -- you never heard that the most important Surprem Court decision in US history, said that.  That blacks are "so inferior" they are not persons.  Not human beings, but "inferior beings".

You get some booooshit about "citizenship" -- instead of the ugly truth that per Roger Taney, blacks were not even human beings -- not persons. Literally, officially, by order of the court, NOT PERSONS but property.

Now -- why the didn't your history teacher tell you that? 

This is IN the decision itself.    That is what it SAYS!  So why didn't you know it?

Probably because  your history teacher just believe the watered down boooshit.  But all you have to do is read the damn decision itself.

 Point 4  is from the order of the court -- the "real deal" part of the decision.  Slaves are "property".

The part about "so inferior" was in the decision.   

This, however, is how Dred Scott is taught -- as a "citizenship" issue and about Congress can't exclude slavery into Kansas.


Bullshit 1 -- the order says specifically blacks are NOT PERSONS -- why the hell not mention that in history classes?

Jefferson Davis bragged about it -- Lincoln railed against it. It's not a minor point, it was the most basic point possible. Are blacks human beings, or not?  Jeff Davis said they were not -- and the SCOTUS said it too -- blacks are inferior beings, and ordered, yes ordered, blacks be "recognized" as property (NOT HUMANS BEINGS)

That's far more that not being "citizens". 

Your history teacher, and almost every book about this, yaps about "citizenship".  Bullshit -- according to Dred Scott, blacks were NOT PERSONS, not human beings!  . They were INFERIOR beings, by the specific language of the court.

Try to grasp this -- the SCOTUS said blacks were "inferior beings" not persons.  Got that? Going too fast?

And how does your teacher teach this?  

Never mind that 98% of the people in KS didn't want slavery -- in fact, fought a bloody war against it.  That DID NOT MATTER to the SCOTUS, nor did in matter to Jeff Davis.

Bet you didn't know that. 

And the government had to protect SLAVERY  in Kansas, by specific language of the court. 

Bullshit 2  -- the order specifically orders the government to protect slavery.   Even though 98% of whites in Kansas rejected slavery.




 the resolves of the entire South, and of the present Administration, that is, to carry the war into the heart of the country, (cheers.)

 to carry the war into the heart of the country, ???

Atchison just told his men, above, the "entire South" wanted these killings and terror. They wanted this "war carried to the heart of the country" 

What the hell war is he talking about?  

Jefferson Davis -- in his public speeches -- said no one on earth tried harder to avoid war than he did. Really he said that.

Davis also

The CIvil War was five years away -- Kansas had only months before been opened up to even the possibility of slavery.  So there were not many slave owners in Kansas. 

Don't forget that - when you read the narratives of this period, it's easy to assume Kansas had hundreds of slave owners there defending their "rights".   No -- there were almost no slave owners there at all!

 Who was there were largely the men paid to be there. Like 

“We can tell the impertinent scoundrels of the [New York] Tribune that they may exhaust an ocean of ink, their Emigrant Aid Societies spend their millions and billions, their representatives in Congress spout their heretical theories until doomsday, and his excellency Franklin Pierce appoint abolitionist after free soiler as governor, yet we will continue to tar and feather, drown, lynch, and hang every white-livered abolitionist who dares to pollute our soil.”



John Geary, the unelected governor of Kansas - named by Jefferson Davis and Franklin Pierce-- was pro-slavery, indeed that's why Jeff Davis appointed him governor.

98% of people in Kansas, as events would prove, were against slavery, but Davis appointed, naturally, a violent and pro slavery governor.   Stephen DOuglas signed off on that, by the way, as Chairman of House and Senate Committee on Kansas.

But Geary eventually turned on the lunatic killers.  The endless killings -- for just speaking and writing newspapers against slavery, was too much for Geary.

 Geary eventually gave copious evidence and documentation about Atchison and Davis to the Congress, which apparently persuaded the next President - Buchanan -- at long last to recognize Kansas as a free state, and reject the violence and bogus legislature BS of Davis and Atchison.   

Just before Lincoln took office -- Kansas officially came in as a state -- a FREE state.  

See the testimony from Geary's physician and personal assistant, at the bottom of this page.    Both Geary and his assistant finally figured out, the only thing Davis and Atchison cared about -- was the SPREAD of slavery, by any means, including killing, all the while claiming lofty motives. 

"[Geary now] repudiates that new plank which has been surreptitiously inserted into the Democratic platform, that gives to the single idea of slavery extension an ascendancy over every other consideration."


None of this is a surprise to anyone alive at the time -- Slave Power loved it, Jefferson Davis defended it as "constitutionally required".  There is not one text book in the US that even mentions Atchison's speech, though a few teachers tell their students about it. 

You should read Sumner's famous speech -- sadly, almost no one does now. CRIMES AGAINST KANSAS

Remember, Atchison had not even started his famous killing sprees -- he spoke May 19 -20, 1856, a two day speech.

Atchison led the first killing raid the next day May 21.   His speech was May 21.

The cane used to beat Sumner for giving this speech, was and is kind of an honored symbol, of Confederate apologist, even today.  What did Sumner do to get beaten?

He spoke about Kansas.   

But early on. in KANSAS,   he boasted of killing -- he would continue to boast for years, and continue to kill.

IN a way Atchison was more honest than others who paid him to kill and helped get him an army of 1700 men from Texas.   They stayed in Washington DC and pretended to care about justice and the Constitution.

An excerpt from Atchison speech --which is below
"Faint not as you approach the city of Lawrence,... draw your revolvers and bowie knives, and cool them in the heart's blood of those damned dogs that dare to defend that damned breathing hole of hell... "
Damn dogs of hell?  That's those folks in Lawrence Kansas who dared let the anti-slavery newspaper print their paper.

Charles Sumner, US Senator from Massachusetts, was beat almost to death on the floor of US Senate, one day before Atchison's speech about killing and terrorizing.


Oh, your text books in school KIND OF mentioned it. They did mention "Bloody Kansas."  But they left a few things out -- we tell you why they left out, and what they left out.

Worse, our text books give you the IMPRESSION that those "FREE STATE" radicals were troublemakers.   No, they went there to live, and intended to live in a Free State -- Kansas was known to be a free territory, because slavery was prohibited there by treaty, and by the Compromises of 1850 and 1820.

Notice -- and this is important -- FIRST Atchison as US Senator, got the Compromise of 1850 struck down, and with the help of Stephen A Douglas and Jefferson Davis,  opened up Kansas for the possibility of slavery, if the people there chose it.

But 98% of the people in Kansas did not want slavery, as events and elections proved! 

Even this basic fact is overlooked in our history books.

Go check any history  text book in the US - while they all do mention Kansas, it's almost a side issue, and we have yet to find one that mentions Atchison's army of thousands hired by Jeff Davis.

And not one text book mentions that when the voters could vote in honest elections, slavery was rejected  by 98%- 2%.



"He is the kindest man, and best patriot, I have ever known"

 The speech shows the difference between what the great speakers said in public, vs what they did in private.   Atchison, Davis, and Douglas especially.   They claimed' state's rights and popular sovereignty.  Their speeches SOUNDED great.


The thing to understand --- Free soilers were 98% of the white people in Kansas.  Kansas whites voted against slavery 98% -2%, and other lopsided stats, when they were finally allowed to vote.  Atchison was trying to frighten and kill enough to get Kansas admitted as a slave state, by stopping all speech against slavery.

That was not at all unusual -- it was already against the law, and had been for 20 years -- in all slave states, to speak or write openly against slavery. Even owning the wrong book got preachers whipped.  SO passing anti free speech laws when Atchison set up the "bogus legislature" was par for the course.

 Atchison had to hire men from Texas to ride with him. And they rode --as Atchison made clear -- under a foreign

 Only a small number of people in Kansas wanted slavery -- and most of those came because they were paid, by guys like Atchison.





Davis biographers "deal" with Davis role in Kansas by several clever and dishonest ways.  

They make it SEEM like those bad old Kansas farmers were beating up and terrorizing folks.  And they throw John Brown in there -- but John Brown reacted after TWO YEARS of killing and terrorizing, and after Davis, as Secretary of War, sent killers to Kansas, like Atchison.    And he was one guy (with his sons).  Remember there were 1700 killers paid by Davis already IN Kansas, killing and terrorizing when Brown started fighting back!  

See how clever this passage is, by a Davis biographer, who knows about Atchison's speech, but avoids mention of it.

Typical Orwellian double speak spin about
Davis and his role in Kansas killings.

You do hear about  the "Trouble In Kanas" in your text books, but its watered down so pathetically, it's meaningless.  They don't even tell you who did the killing, who was killed, or why.

Notice how he first says "Kansas was in constant aggravation" -- KANSAS?   How about mentioning a name, and tell who did what, to whom, and why.   Try to grasp this "Kansas was in constant aggravation" is Orwellian bullshit. 

Notice he then cleverly  inserts some nonsense about "shot guns" brought in by those mean old free state folks.   Never mind that already Atchison was killing folks -- those bad guys brought in shot guns. Very typical slick BS. 

 Bullshit -- recall Atchison made fun of the guns those free state folks had, the "Breecher Rifle"  The "Breecher Rifle" was the bible. and Atchison is laughing about it!   

The narrative guys like WC Davis takes work, carefully avoiding any mention of Davis paying for the 1700 men riding under a foreign flag, to kill and terrorize people in Kansas. 

The Kansas farmers got armed - - AFTER the attacks,  and of course WC Davis knows that. But he doesn't tell you.

Then guys like WC Davis claim that crazy old "John Brown"  was killing people in Kansas. Yes, AFTER Atchison killed his brother, and AFTER two years of terrorizing people and hiring 1700 men from Texas to help him kill and terrorize.

Scum sucking pigs like WC Davis  is as cowardly and deceptive as the original Jeff Davis.   Just like Jeff Davis "forgot" to mention in his speeches that Kansas rejected slavery over and over, and fought against slavery for years, WC Davis does exactly the same bullshit.

Shame on the book reviewers that gave WC Davis any support.   

When finally someone fights back -- as John Brown did -- that is the bad guy?    Yeah, Brown was violent -- after he saw some of his own family killed, after years of killing by Atchison.  



Remember, Atchison hired 1700 men, bragged about the killings, worked for Jeff Davis, all these guys were paid.

But read how WC Davis put it, in one of his boooshit books. 

The way WC plays it -- "Atchison supported pro-slavery group" -- fucking hell, he hired the bastards, paid the bastards, and bragged bout their killing. WC DAVIS -- ever the coward and liar -- writes "supported pro slavery groups"

As to the violence?  WC Davis --- piece of shit in our book  --seems to blame the Kansas farmers, for the violence, and says "EVENTS QUICKLY GOT OUT OF HAND"

No, not that.  Atchison quickly started his killing spree.

And remember, Southern "historians" like Davis know this -- they know David Atchison speech, they know he bragged about killing, they know all that better than I do.

Why -- it's 150 years later. Why would guys like  Davis (and others, Shelby Foote, ect)  gloss over this?   

No -- the cause of the Civil War was not complicated -- the excuses they make up are complicated, the boooshit double talk is complicated.  But the incessant violent efforts to spread slavery caused the US Civil Sar.  Not slavery itself -- but the crazy violent efforts to spread slavery. 

Ironically, Davis and Lincoln agreed on this -- it was the SPREAD of slavery that mattered --to Davis, who wanted the spread, and to Lincoln, who wanted first to STOP the spread.

Sound like "states rights" to you?

And remember Atchison bragged about the goal.  To kill and silence every god damn abolitionist in Kansas. Why do we not teach that?

And it's not like this is the only record -- this speech. There are plenty of newspaper articles at the time, books, and other documents showing what was going on, who was killing who.


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?

You think they don't know Davis was Secretary of War?   Do you think they don't know Davis named Atchison "General of Law and Order".

You think they don't know about Crimes Against Kansas speech, by Charles Sumner?  YOu think they don't know about Atchison's speech?

Do you think they don't know Atchison  got this army of killers from Texas, and paid them "amply". 

Of course they know.   They just hope YOU don't know.


YES -- John Brown did killing of his own in Kansas - but this was AFTER the killing raids by Atchison and others.

In fact, Brown's sons went to Kansas and were attacked by Atchison and others like him.  Brown's brother was killed by them.

For some reason, when you read about Brown, no one even tells you he went to Kansas BECAUSE of the killers who were there spreading slavery by violence.   To read most descriptions, Brown was some extremist who "took his hatred and violence to Kansas".

Hello dumb ass -- the hatred and violence were in Kansas, and one of the paid killers was Davis Atchison, who bragged about it!

If you don't know what happened before Brown even got there -- you don't know shit.   If you don't know of the killings, tortures, burnings, you don't know shit.

If Atchison and others were not killing, torturing, burning, looting Brown would not even go to Kansas in the first place.  Too complicated for most "historians" who don't seem to grasp Kansas was bloody before Brown set foot there.   He was fighting back.

It took five years to straighten out this mess, and get Kansas admitted as a free state


 Atchison speech indicates where those men came from, and how paid them.  The more you read that speech, the more you go "WTFH"? 

  • Atchison 
  • bragged about riding under foreign flag
  • bragged he was funded by federal authorities (Davis)
  • bragged the men could keep loot they stole
  • bragged they were there to terrorize and kill
  • bragged "authorities" wanted the war taken to Kansas

Atchison's killings did not work. 

The killings did not work because men fought back.

Atchison was  a coward -- and ran like one when he and his men did not outnumber those he was killing 

Remember that -- men like Atchison were brave in groups, but like Jeff Davis himself, was a coward when he did not outnumber the victims.

Sound like "states rights" to you?  


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 K Davis, and every other "Davis expert" does.

Think they forgot when writing their books? 

And he didnt even have the balls to include the word "slavery" in is Orwellian double tax "EXPANSIONISM WAS AN ISSUE".

EXPANSIONISM was an issue?  Hell, that does not tell you who killed who, or why, does it?  No. And K Davis, nor any other Davis biographer, will tell you about Davis role in these killings. 

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?

Sound like "states rights" to you?

Davis boasted that blacks are not human beings but inferior beings -- property. As property, Kansas, according to Jeff Davis own book, and own speeches, MUST PROTECT slavery. It did not matter to Davis that  98% or 100% of the people in Kansas were against slavery. The public had no say in slavery in Kansas, according to Jeff Davis.


What pissed Davis off in 1855, still pissed him off in 1861 when he demanded the spread of slavery into Kansas, and STILL pissed him off in 1870 when he wrote his book, Rise and Fall of the Confederacy.

Of all the "grievances" Davis had with the US - -do you know what he said the INTOLERABLE one? Go on, guess.

The resistance to the SPREAD of slavery into Kansas.

That's right -- he was pissed off enough in 1855 to send Atchison there and fund those killers.

He was pissed off enough in 1861 to demand the SPREAD of slavery into Kansas -- never mind that by then, Kansas had come into the Union as free state, lawfully, signed by President Buchanan and passed in the US house of representatives. 

And he was STILL pissed off about resistance to spread of slavery -- into Kansas -- in 1870 when he wrote "Rise and Fall". 


Think about this  for a while --  every day, for all those years, Davis knew that 90% or more of the people in Kansas rejected slavery.  The votes were overwhelming!  But according to Davis  twisted mind -- that didn't matter, because of Dred Scott.

Yes Dred Scott, according to Davis -- changed it all.   It no longer mattered what the people wanted. It no longer mattered what congress said. It no longer mattered what the Territorial legislature said -- they rejected slavery.

Because Dred Scott decision said this -- read it. Its from Davis book.

Text books do cover this -- but in a very superficial way, repeating watered down nonsense.  

under construction.

Douglas  was Chairman of House and Senate Committee on Kansas Territory. He personally prevented documents from Kansas that would have admitted Kansas as a free state, for years.  He waited till his friend, David Atchison, sent documents from his violent and "bogus legislature"  to claim Kansas voters wanted slavery.

Only when Douglas lost his Chairmanship, and could no longer stop Congress from acting on statehood for Kansas as a free state, did Kansas come into the US.

Of all the bastards who helped the killing at the time, Stephen A Douglas was the most awful.  Don't believe that shit about Douglas being for popular sovereignty. He literally held, in his hands, documents that would have prevented Atchison and Jefferson Davis from killing in Kansas.   

Yes, the bastard made speeches for popular sovereignty - but in the background, he helped the killers in Kansas crush popular sovereignty.   

Worse than help the killers, Douglas gave Jefferson Davis very good reason to hope  he could force slavery down the throats of Kansas, and spread slavery to the West, as he and Atchison wanted.   If Douglas had not been such a rotten bastard,  Jefferson Davis would have no such reason to hope he could kill enough, to get the job done.