Smart Books about This

  • Conquest of Kansas, 1856 book




This man was beaten.......

A US Senator beaten almost to death on the Senate floor, after he spoke about another Senator who was in Kansas boasting about killing and torturing to spread slavery.

As this man laughed 
Stephen A Douglas shown laughing at Sumner as Sumner was beaten
.Douglas and Atchison had passed Kansas Act together. 

Sumner had just spoken -- for two days -- about the crimes in Kansas committed by this man --and his hired men.

Senator Atchison's killing sprees in Kansas 1856 was no secret.


Atchison's killings and tortures did not start in 1856, that is just when Atchison's newly hired men arrived, and they invaded Lawrence Kansas.   They had already been killing -- and torturing -- but not masses of men did the dirty work.

The 1000 or more men -- the new  hires -- just arrived from Texas, South Carolina and Texas.  Up to that point, Atchison had used Missouri men -- hired men, paid men -- by they were not as violent and eager to kill as the Southern men.  The Southern men responded to newspaper ads where in Atchison made it very clear, it would be killing time.

"The time for talk was over"  Atchison said in the ads.   But Atchison had been killing and torturing select people for two years - including John Brown's son, Frederick.  They also tortured his other son -- until he went mad.  (Possibly castration).


The speech that should be in every US text book in the United States -- but is not in any text book....


Remember this -- because it's important...... Senator Sumner's speech was about the killings and tortures done BEFORE Atchison's men arrived from the South. 

Those  1854-1856 killings and tortures were school picnics compared to what happened when Atchison's men from the South showed up.  

Now they had overwhelming force -- Atchison thought. 


All kinds of things happened because of the Southern men in Kansas killing and torturing, while paid by Jeff Davis and led by David Rice Atchison.

One thing that happened- - John Brown, after one son was driven mad by torture, and another killed by Atchison's men,  decided to fight back.

Lincoln ended up going to Kansas.

A number of Democrat politicians went to Kansas, saw what was going on, met with Lincoln,  and helped Lincoln get elected -- 100% because of what Atchison did in Kansas that speech.

And much much more, including the US Civil War happened because of it.

The point is, Atchison speech (and of course his actions connected to his speech) should be in every US text book in America, but is not. 


One of the most amazing acts of violence leading to US Civil War we do not teach, or even mention, in a candid way.  Of course it's not just one speech by the man doing it, there is much much more.

Jefferson Davis himself, as you will see, publically and proudly declared he was sending Confederate troops North to enslave blacks -- in the NORTH

Be you did not know that.  Davis boasted of it, then, but sang a different tune entirely later.

We should teach that... it's basic, fundamental,  and incontrovertible.

Southern leaders -- repeatedly, in context, over time, loudly and proudly boasted of killing to spread slavery.

Yes, they did.

Southern leaders even made it clear (see Davis) he was spreading slavery against, against, yes, against, state's rights.

Not my fault no one told you.  Davis not only told the country proudly, Davis even wrote -- in his own declaration -- that he was saying this now (about spreading slavery North)  so that "there would be no misunderstanding in the future."

Link to Davis official proclamation  in his own papers, and in Richmond newspapers, at the time -- here

We haven't done an official canvass of history teachers, high school or college, but so far we have not met one history teacher that even knew about Davis official proclamation, much less knew the details, and even much less, taught about it.

What's that tell you about US schools, even colleges, and their "scholarship" about Southern leaders?



Oh your history teacher may have mentioned Sumner being beaten on the floor of the Senate.  Maybe  a ten second blurp. Routinely, now, however Sumner is blamed for being beaten, with a quick mention of Sumner supposedly insulting someone's wife (not true)  and then right to John Brown's attack in Kansas.

Stunning stupidity, that.  We show you how completely bogus well intentioned history teachers can be, simply by not knowing and not teaching the basic facts, but seem eager to repeat narratives that were always bullshit.

When your history teacher can not tell the difference between bullshit narratives and who did what,  students don't have much chance.



In the case of the US Civil War -- who killed who, and why, is real history.  Add all the BS you want (bs can be true)  but get right, first, who killed who, and why.

Atchison, Davis, and others helped on that score, they BRAGGED and even officially made it clear what they were doing, and why.

They made it clear they were killing to SPREAD slavery.

Not just keep it, S P R E A D it, and spread slavery against states rights.  Not just once or twice, not in some "gotcha" state of excitment or bravado.

Repeatedly, clearly,  proudly, they bragged about who they killed and who they tortured to spread slavery.

There was a time (until they lost)  that they were proud of such things.  They did not hide such things.

So,  If your history teacher knew who killed who, and why --and what the killers bragged about, till they lost,  your history teacher would at least have a chance of teaching you correctly.

That's why it's so corrupting if your teacher and text book don't know or omit such basic things as Southern War Ultimatums, Atchison's speech boasting of killing to spread slavery,  etc. etc. 

But if they do not know who was killing who, and why  -- they may as well skip over the 19th century, or they necessarily make you dumber than if they didn't say a word about it.

And to an astonishing extent,  our history teachers and US text books either do not know, or have substantially white washed Southern leaders killing sprees, boasts of killing to spread slavery, and war ultimatums.

Not good things to miss, or not know, or whitewash.


History teachers are like you.  They only can know what they are somehow told.

So -- it makes a difference who tells them, and what they are told. History teachers are as bound by the logic of "you only know what you are told"  as you are. 

That's just human nature. It's not a conspiracy, it's just humans repeating things, and oftentimes, leaving out full set of facts. 

I have yet to meet a history teacher -- or even PhDs in history working at libraries or public places dispensing history of this era, that can tell me what Atchison did.  

Atchison was the man Sumner was talking about -- for two days.  What did Sumner say about him?

They do not know.

What did Atchison do?

They do not know.

Oh I am sure somewhere a history teacher knows.   Or a typical "PhD" in history knows. I just have not met them.

After you show them  (the "expert)  what went on, they go "Oh yeah, yeah, I heard about that, yeah".

Clearly they never heard a thing about it, at least in a way that could explain. 

That's as sad about our  "scholars"  on US Civil War as it is about our education system. If our "scholars" can be this stupid, how the hell are the kids supposed to learn this?

It does not, it can not, get more basic that this, regarding US Civil War.

And you are about to learn why.


Sumner was beaten, almost to death, on the floor of the United States Senate, after a speech he gave about David Rice Atchison, and Atchison's hired men, and their "Crimes in Kansas".

That speech -- the name of it -- is well known. Drastically and stupidly less known, is what facts Sumner laid out, for two days, horrific detail after horrific detail, of crimes committed by US Senator Atchison and his  hired men.

Sumner even explained (though it needed no explanation) that Atchison had passed Kansas Act with Stephen A Douglas...  then Atchison immediately went to Kansas to terrorizing, later kill, and boast about killing to spread slavery.

Most history teachers know that Sumner gave the "Crimes against Kansas" speech.    Virtually none of them know (we have yet to meet any that knew) the basics - that Sumner was talking about, by name, very clearly, the killings and tortures by David Rice Atchison and his men in Kansas.

So of course, they could not know an even more stunning detail..... Atchison was in Kansas, and gave  h is own speech, boasting (yes boasting) of doing exactly what Sumner had accused him of.

Here is that speech......

Stephen A Douglas shown laughing at Sumner as he was beaten.Douglas and Atchison had passed Kansas Act together. 


David Rice Atchison.... the man who passed Kansas Act, then bragged he was in Kansas  killing to spread slavery there and to the Pacific,  "for the entire South". 

Not just ONE of the most important men in United States during the 1850's,  he was the most important.  He not only passed the Kansas Act, and insisted Stephen A Douglas  help him do so,   then Atchison, Douglas and Jeff Davis personally went to President Pierce to have  him sign the Kansas Act.

Then -- most importantly of all -- Atchison personally went to Kansas, hired over 1000 men, and started to terrorize, later kill and boast of it, to spread slavery "for the entire South"

Atchison even added in his speech this was the most joyous day of his life. 

You are about to find out why.


Oh you may have heard of David Rice Atchison, yes, in a game of "history trivia".  

Your history teacher, like your drunk uncle Jack,  would be proud as a peacock if he could tell you that "trivia".

History teachers and drunk uncles  are the kind that want you to think that anyone who knows such fascinating trivia, even if it's false,  has the actual history down pat.

Uh -- not so much.


Stupidly,  most history teachers know Senator Atchison only as the guy who --some say -- was President of US for one day.

No, he was not.   

They have no idea, and do not teach, he passed the Kansas Act.  How do we know? Not only did he brag about it, not only was he clearly the man, with Douglas, who passed it according to the record,  maybe the most famous speech given 1840 - 1880 (other than Lincoln's speeches)  was about Atchison passing the Kansas Act, then rushing off to Kansas to terrorize, and kill.

That would be the "Crimes Against Kansas" Speech,  the speech Senator Charles Sumner was beaten for, nearly to death, on the Senate floor.

So it was no secret.  Quite the opposite, Atchison boasted of his role in Kansas Act and according to Jeff Davis himself, Atchison went with him (and Stephen A Douglas) to the President personally to sign the Kansas Act. 

How do you miss that?  I really want to know.

Since I came upon Atchison speech, and the surrounding boasting by others associated with him of their kiling to spread slavery, too,  I kept things, WTF.

Why have I never heard of this before?

I knew I was  never taught it in highschool or college.  But why the hell is this not a central part of what we teach re Civil War.

Not just Atchison -- but Jeff Davis too -- was bragging about killing to spread slavery, as you will see.


But our text books give no hint of that, much less explain it bluntly.  The man who passed the Kansas Act left immediately, went to Kansas and started terrorizing, later killing, to spread slavery.

And - Atchison boasted of it.

So, at the very least, every high school teacher should know Atchison very well..... Atchison is the US Senator that passed Kansas Act with Stephen A Douglas. 

Then he bragged about killing to spread slavery, and hired over 1000 men to do so.  He almost got that done.

It's a near certainty that your history teacher -- be they a PhD or just a BA,  do not know either of those basic facts.  

If you know any history teacher, better yet, a PhD in US history. Ask them, without any hint in advance 

The stunning thing about Atchison passing the Kansas Act is that then, immediately,  Atchison went to Kansas personally  and there started terrorizing, later killing (and boasting of it) to spread slavery "for the entire South".   He also sent Jeff Davis reports of the progress of the killings, as you will see.

Atchison makes it clear, these killings are with "the resolve of the entire South....  and of the present administration"

By present administration, he meant his only three superiors  -- Stephen A Douglas, the Chairman of House and Senate Committee on Kansas,  Jefferson Davis, Secretary of War, and Franklin Pierce, US President 

For the entire South, Atchison said. 


It's important to know --- when did this happen?

Kansas Act passed (Atchison and Douglas pushed it through) in 1854.   Atchison hired killers, from South Carolina, Alabama, and Texas, arrived in 1856.

Lincoln had not even run for US Senate by then.   So those who blame Lincoln for starting the Civil War need to learn a few basic facts -- like time management. 

According to Atchison HIMSELF, the South was already at war. He called it war.   Don't forget that. Don't let your "history teacher" cover his or her stupidity, they don't even know what Atchison was doing, or who he hired, or by what authority they were killing and torturing in Kansas.

Your history teacher has no clue, most likely, that Atchison ever gave ANY speech, much less the speech where he boast to his newly hired men about killing in Kansas.

Atchison said it was war -- and the men cheered.  Atchison said they were there to spread slavery -- and the men cheered.   I would assume Atchison knew more that your  history teacher.

Indeed, it was a war, although an unfair one.  With cannon (Atchison had the cannon) the hired men (Atchison had the hired men)   Atchison had money, men and weapons, while the citizens of Kansas, for a time, had no leader, no weapons like Atchison did,  and no practical way to fight back.   

 Remember this too, Atchison was proud of this --proud in his speeches, proud in his ads in Southern papers advertising for men to kill in Kansas ('the time for talk is over' --  they never even bothered to talk the people of Kansas into accepting slavery)     Atchison's mission matched exactly his actions and his words

his mission was this --   to spread slavery to the Pacific. Not just into Kansas -- but to the Pacific.   And it almos worked.

In case you wonder if Atchison was aware 90% or more of Kansas citizens were against slavery -- yes, he and Douglas passed Kansas Act vowing that slavery would not go into Kansas unless they wanted it, and that 19 out of 20 white people in Kansas was against slavery anyway). 

In fact, Atchison had nearly NO voluntary and organic -- local -- support for killing to spread slavery.  In fact, he had no such support as far as we know.

His support was from outside of Kansas, and almost all of it, paid.



 Virtually everyone who attacked the citizens of Kansas were from somewhere else, and did not live in Kansas in 1854.  Nor did they live there when the killings got much worse -- 1856. 

Atchison's men came there because Atchison hired them.

Not that there was zero support for slavery, but there was zero support to kill to SPREAD slavery.

That was entirely Atchison's doing.  


I know of no other point in American history where anyone was more clear than David Rice Atchison about what he was doing.  Jeff Davis was clear too -- but no one MORE clear.  Atchison made it repeatedly clear, not just in that speech, but by other speeches and even in the newspaper he owned in Kansas.   And the publications put out by his friends about killing abolitionist. 

Atchison made it so clear -- the war was to spread slavery.  By force. it is a mockery, an absurdity, for anyone to say otherwise.

Remember, Atchison nor Davis, nor the killers, tried to spread slavery  by popular vote -- Atchison stopped all honest voting.  In fact, he created a "Bogus legislature"  that quickly made it a crime to speak or write publicly against slavery.

So when someone (your teacher) tries to tell you the Kansas Act was about "popular sovereignty"  its clear they don't have a clue who was doing what.


Atchison's early killing sprees, his first invasions, his boasting of killing to spread slavery, was BEFORE Lincoln even ran for Senate. Years before.

How the hell can anyone in their right mind blame Lincoln?   Or blame Lincoln's election?   

They can blame Lincoln's election because they don't know the facts. 

If you simply omit everything Atchison, his men, and Jeff Davis did, yes, you can blame Lincoln.

 Lincoln was still unknown to most of the country, by then.  Atchison was very well known.  And he was in Kansas, officially sent by Jefferson Davis, and he terrorized, later killed, called it a war to spread slavery.

Remember this -- Atchison was boasting the South was already at war. Why?  Because they were. 

The men Atchison was speaking to were not from Kansas.  At first he hired Missouri men to invade.    Then, when there were not enough willing men in Missouri, he hired men from Texas, South Carolina, and Alabama. Atchison made it clear in the advertizing that they would be killing -  the time for talk is over, Atchison's add read.   When he first met the men, as you can see from his speech to them, Atchison made them promise to kill.

Atchison even made it clear the flag they rode under -- the "Southern flag"  was red.  Red for the color of blood, blood to spill to spread slavery.

Not keep slavery -- to spread it.


If Atchison could have kept enough paid killers coming to Kansas, and then continue paying them, US history would be drastically different

  A basic problem for him -- he ran out of money
When Jeff Davis, in 1858, could no longer send him money as Secretary of War there were not enough donations coming in from the South.  The men did not do this for free -- they did it for money.
Jeff Davis lost Secretary of War  job in 1858.   He could no longer send them money.   The Kansas men were fighting back by that point -- Atchison had told his men the Kansas men would not fight back, they were cowards.  He was wrong. 



Atchison went to Kansas BECAUSE he knew that Kansas citizens were trying to enter the US as a free state.  And he promised, proudly, he would see Kansas in hell first.

At the time, 95% of the Kansas citizens were against -- remember this -- against slavery.   Atchison had no choice but to use violence, and use it quickly.  He almost succeeded. . 

Copy of David R. Atchison speech to proslavery forces - Page

Atchison speech to paid killers, just arrived


Atchison was by no means the only Southern leader boasting of it. He not only worked for Jeff Davis, Jeff Davis said in writing that everything Atchison did was "Constitutionally required"

Davis would go on to himself brag about invading the North to enslave blacks there -- a fact that is indisputable, but hardly known.  See more about Davis official proclamation of invading the North to enslave blacks there -- wherein he wrote that he issued the proclamation so there "would be no misunderstanding in the future".

In fact, when you lay out all the speeches, proclamations, war ultimatums, Southern newspapers and books at the time, you have to wonder -- why is this overlooked at all?  This is as basic as basic gets.... Southern leaders themselves boasted of it loudly, proudly, repeatedly, in context.

Jeff Davis himself -- remember this -- made it very clear, in fact, he boasted of this -- that he would use the rebel army to invade the North and enslave blacks there.

Davis explained in the address himself --  to make sure there would be "no misunderstanding in the future."

Let me repeat that....

Davis explained in the address himself --  to make sure there would be "no misunderstanding in the future."

Short of renting billboard space 150 years in advance, it's hard to see how, at that moment, Davis could get this message to the future in any clearer way

Have you ever heard of this declaration?  

It was not a surprise to anyone alive at the time. It very much fit in to Southern leaders other declarations and boasting.  But for clarity and official proclamation by the leader himself, it's hard to do better or more specific.   What they hell do we need-- for him to write it in blood, sign it, and make a youtube video about it?


I can't help it that no one told you. Not my fault. In many ways, our "historians" like McPherson have been cowardly if not stupid about candidly exposing Southern leaders own proud killing sprees and declarations.   Maybe McPherson just enjoys not pissing off the South?

You should have been told. 

Kansas killing sprees were not only massively important -- and Lincoln went there to meet with DEMOCRATS there in 1859 who ended up helping him get nomination and then elected...... Kansas  shows how leading DEMOCRATS turned against their party, helped defeat the Davis paid and Atchison led killers, and to win the Civil War.  As far as I know, this is almost totally ignored. 

Literally, there is more information from "historians" like Bruce Catton and even James McPherson, about what a given group of soldiers ate for lunch or about what time of day they arrived at a battle,  than about Southern War Ultimatums and Jeff Davis boasting of killing to spread slavery North.

Excuse my french, please -- but WHAT THE FUCK...

Southern leaders boasting of killing to spread slavery. Their top most leaders, including Jeff Davis and the man who passed Kansas Act.  We do not teach such things, worse, we simply pretend the opposite.

This book hits the topic right between the's about Lincoln's trip to Kansas -- after Atchison and Davis had made it a crime in Kansas to speak against slavery publically there.

It helps if you know already that Davis and Atchison had made it a crime to speak or write publicly against slavery (as it was already in slave states).   The book is also about the DEMOCRATS who personally saw the killings by Southern leaders in Kansas, and flipped sides to help Lincoln get the nomination,and win the election.

  Some of the most amazing men, Democrats, actually were part of the 116 -- Lincoln's guards you never heard about.  

   Why didn't you know that?   Simple -- no one told you.  

   Until now. 

Another book which in the 1960's hit this "right between the eyes"  is 

So this is not unknown.... it's just not stated in any candid way in our text books, and our national consciousness.




According to the men who actually started the killing....

The Civil War was actually a war started by the South in 1856,  officially. Yes, officially,  as boasted of at the time by US Senator David Rice Atchison, who was in Kansas, being paid by,  Secretary of War Jeff Davis. 

Atchison could not be more clear.  He was there, he hired the men to be there, in order to SPREAD slavery.  And that was in 1856.  Lincoln's election did not start the Civil War -- don't believe that crap, and it is crap.   

But that crap will make sense to you, if you do not know that Southern leaders were already calling it war, already killing, and they already issued War Ultimatums!

We do of course teach about Kansas.  But stupidly, our text books talk about "The trouble in Kansas"   and blame both sides.   And they quickly go to John Brown (leaving out many basic facts there, too).

There is not a single text book in the US that even mentions Southern War Ultimatums, or, as far as I know,  show Atchison boasting of starting the war, or Jeff Davis proud official declarations of invading the North to spread slavery there.

Not. One.

How the hell did that happen?

Let me repeat this --it's very basic.  Southern leaders not only started the killings and tortures, they said clearly the goal was to spread slavery, spread it against state's rights. and spread it to the Pacific and the North.

The last of three invasions of Lawrence -- in this third raid, women and children were simply shot in the head,. or worse.  

Why Lawrence?  Because that was the city that defied Atchison's law --they allowed an anti-slavery newspaper to continue there, until Atchison men invaded.

Don't believe me?  Read Atchison's speech, he is joyous about this first killing spree into Atchison. His word -- joy. 

Why do we just call these invasions, tortures, and boasting of killing "trouble"?  

Why not make it clear what the leaders were boasting of, loud and proud, at the time.


When Lincoln said over, and over, and over, and over that Kansas Act and Dred Scott were the mechanism to spread slavery to the entire USA, we stupidly think he was using hyperbole.  Hell no.

He did not just say this in what we call "House Divided" speech. Lincoln explained this dozens upon dozens of time, sometimes for hours on end.

He did not comment on it.  From the day Atchison passed Kansas Act in Congress, in fact, Lincoln did little but, hour after hour, day after day, explaining this to the public.  He spoke of in detail in hundreds of cities.

Not as a theoretical possibility -- but as fact, and he was right, which no reasonable person could deny, if they knew what the hell Southern leaders were bragging about, and who/ where they were killing.

The "state's right" shit came mostly AFTER the Civil War, when Southern apologist put out endless excuses and double speak, that are largely the basis of most US text books, and most US education on the topic -- probably a result of South school boards and their effect on text book publishing

JUST remember -- Jeff Davis himself made it very clear, at the time, states had no right to keep slavery out, Kansas had no right to keep slavery out, and the exact "logic" of this claim, Davis stated himself.   He justified it by the Dred Scott Decision.





Were all the same thing. I will show you how this is taught in US today ---  and  you tell me what is missing.

How this is taught today -- what is missing?

 See it closer ---- clever stuff ....

Let's see what they "forget".

5000 Ruffians?   They act like these guys materialized out of no where.  Not one word they were paid. Thousands of paid men, many from far away, getting paid.

Not one word who leads them -- David Rice Atchison.

Not one word that Atchison personally got Kansas Act passed, then rushed to Kansas to terrorize, later kill and destroy.

Not one word that Atchison BOASTED he was there with the men to kill to spread slavery.

It would be impossible -- not difficult -- to have any clue what the hell actually went on from History Channel. You would literally be dumber after you read this, than before, unless you knew the things that actually went on.

The next attack they also do not mention David Rice Atchison. In fact, they make it seem like John Brown was the bad guy. By that time, Atchison men had killed on of Brown's son, drove the other insane by torture (probably castration) and promised to kill not only all abolitionist (anyone not for slavery, they considered abolitionist) but they promised to kill Brown and the rest of his family.

That's when Brown fought back.

They leave that out too, essentially blaming Brown. 

Reeder approved the election ?  Really, actually Reeder would personally go to DC and tell the President the election was a violent fraud -- but the President already knew it. He was part of the fraud.

   Reeder, Lane, Geary,  and other Democrats soon figured out  that Atchison and Jeff Davis sent them to Kansas -- they believed it then -- to have honest elections.  In fact, Jim Lane was Democrat Congressmen from Indiana, in Kansas to help Kansas citizen get an honest election.

A number of Democrats like this then personally SAW the killings, saw Atchison claim one thing -- then do the other.

  Jim Lane and other Dems would be crucial in getting Lincoln nominated -- remember they were Democrats -- and in defeating Atchison and his paid killers in Kansas.





Lincoln knew what these Southerners were doing, and boasting about.  So it was not just Lincoln that knew -- it was Southern leaders boasting about it to each other, to their men,  in their own publications  that is so overlooked now.

 We do not teach that in our history books.  Instead, idiotically, we teach the Jeff Davis post war bullshit --bullshit Davis said and wrote later.  Not the words, speeches, documents, and writings at the time.

Monumental stupidity?  Sorta of.   But once you buy into a narrative, for various reasons, it's difficult and unnatural to burst out of it.

Instead it become natural, easy, for some "historians"  to simply not know (because no one told them)  or not care (because they have a fine narrative going without such details) to keep with the narrative of bullshit.

 Davis bragged early that they would spread slavery to the North, as you will see.  And indeed, he sent soldiers North, and indeed, they did enslave blacks in the NORTH (though they chained them together, took them back South, and sold them as slaves there).  This was during the Civil War.

Before the Civil War, Davias sent killers to Kansas, with David Rice Atchison as their official leader.  Davis named Atchison as "General of Law and Order in Kansas Territories".  There, Atchison hired the thousand or more men, and when he met them bragged they would spread slavery to the Pacific.

And they tried to to exactly that.


There are probably not one in 100  high school history teachers in the US that even know Southern leaders,  clearly, repeatedly, in context, bragged they were killing -- and at war -- to spread slavery, and spread it against (remember this) yes against state's rights...... until they lost.

So it's impossible for your history teacher to tell you, if they were never told, and it's not in your, or their, text book.

But at the time Southern leaders were proud of this.  They were not coy, not ashamed, not politically correct, as some say.  They were killing to spread slavery, spread it for GOD, and spread it AGAINST state's rights.

That's very important -- they were killing to spread slavery against states rights, after Kansas citizens voted 90% and more against slavery.   




Yes before 1856, South leaders at times claimed state's rights. Not nearly as much as they used this excuse later, after the lost. But they did say here and there state's rights.

But that all changed when Kansas citizens were cleary against slavery.   In fact, according to Southern writers then, it was not just proper to kill abolitionist who lived in Kansas -- it  was the duty of Southern men to eradicate those living in Kansas who were against slavery.


Kill them ALL.  Let me repeat, kill them all.

 Kill who?  Abolitionists.  And remember,  anyone who was not for the spread of slavery, in Southern leaders eyes, was an abolitionist. No difference whatsoever.



But states rights was NOT a term they used from 1856 to 1861 about Kansas and the West.  Even California and Oregon, already free states, must be slave states.

You will be stunned to learn (most likely)  that Jeff Davis himself boasted officially in January of 1863 that he was making it very clear then  "so there will be no misunderstanding in the future"  that he would use the Confederate Army to enslave in the North.

Davis Address to People of the North

That address, official address by Davis personally, to the people of the free states,  would be bizarre news to 95% of high school and college "history teachers".  It should not be odd or treated as trivia.  it's basic as hell.

 Davis official proclamation of enslaving in the NORTH  by force of arms?  Surely he was drunk, right?

Hell no, he had made it clear ALREADY, by sending Atchison to Kansas, by paying the killers Atchison hired, that they were killing to spread slavery, and spread it against the will of the people, into Kansas and beyond.


 Southern leaders had already been killing to spread slavery.

In fact, slavery had never spread any other way.

There is this goofy notion that slavery spread by peaceful means, that "Missouri wanted Slavery"  or what not.   Stupidly our history teachers assume slavery was injected by honorable means and no one was against it.

Actually,  in the South, you could be arrested and tortured for owning the wrong BOOK -- a set of laws that Atchison would pass in Kansas as soon as he could.  Atchison then set out to kill and terrorize those who dared to publish anti-slavery newspapers in Kansas.

Very basic.  Profoundly basic.  Kill those who even published anti-slavery newspapers.

  Over and over and over Southern leaders made this clear.  And it was well known.   I can't help it that this is not taught now,  Southern leaders did all they could to make it clear then.

The important point is, instantly, the very second it was clear Kansas citizen were overwhelmingly (90% and more) against slavery, that excuse was gone.  Instantly it did not matter if 100% of the people in Kansas, instead of just 90 and 95%, were against slavery.

Kansas MUST become a slave state, regardless.



the "logic"  of South leaders justification for killing torturing and using paid killers in Kansas (which they sure did) was the Kansas Act  and Dred Scott decision.  

In fact, Southern leaders came up with both things -- as you will see --Kansas Act and Dred Scott, to justify the killing they were already doing.   That is important for you to know -- the killings and tortures were first.   When that was not enough, they came up with Kansas Act and Dred Scott.

David Rice Atchison himself -- leader of the killers in Kansas, personally pushed Stephen A Douglas to pass Kansas Act with him, a US Senator from Missouri.

Then, after Atchison passed Kansas Act, he immediately (remember this) went to Kansas to terrorize, later torture and kill, to spread slavery there, and spread slavery to all of the West-- and he bragged about it.


If 99% of high school teachers don't even know that, and no history text books make it clear, no wonder most Americans don't  know, in any clear way, what caused the US Civil War.

Let me be clear -- Southern leaders bragged -- bragged -- they started the Civil War, did you know that?   And they bragged -- bragged -- they were killing to spread slavery.



To survive -- for the white race to survive (remember this, it was screamed about repeatedly in speeches to cheering crowds, at the time -- the South must expand slavery.

In order to survive.

So state's right's did not matter. The leaders, those winning elections, and getting power, were flooding the minds of people North and South that  black men will take our women

White survival was at stake. 

That was their justification -  publically, and privatedly.

When Kansas citizens were clearly against slavery, and tried to come into the Union as a free state, there was no "discussion"  no "let's work this out".

Southern leaders, as you will see, sent paid killers into Kansas not to convince the citizens of Kansas of the benefits of slavery -- but to terrorize, and later kill, those who dared stay or enter Kansas that were against slavery.

That slavery always spread by such violence is the basic stupidity of our education, and the most obvious, best documented, part of the killings to spread slavery is documented by the killers themselves.

In their own words, their own books, their own speeches at the time.  It was INTOLERABLE that the people of Kansas, themselves or through their legislature,  resisted slavery.

They MUST -- MUST accept and respect slavery, and fulfill the order of the United States Supreme Court to protect slavery. 

There are probably not five teachers in US history, even at college level, that can too you this --  yet Jeff Davis boasted of it, and it is actually in the Dred Scott decision as an order.  The Supreme Court ordered- - ordered -- ordered -- the federal government to protect slavery, and ordered that blacks not be seen as human beings, (not persons) but as property. 

Go listen to 20 lectures on youtube by "experts"  in Dred Scott. They use euphamisms, like "blacks can not be citizens".

Hell, they ordered the federal government to protect slavery!   They ordered that blacks not be seen as human beings.  

And these orders -- according to Jeff Davis himself -- made the resistance to slavery into Kansas "intolerable".

So intolerable he was justified to send killers to Kansas, and start the Civil War.   But they started the Civil War, and bragged they started it, in 1856.   Remember that.  Your history teacher won't know, but now you do. 

Everyting Atchison did -- killing, torture, declaring war, setting up cannon, making it illegal to speak against slavery or publish newspapers against slavery -- was all justified, by Dred Scott,  according to Jeff Davis, writing after the Civil War.

One tiny problem.  And almost no one noticed this. Dred Scott decision didn't even come out until AFTER -- AFTER -- remember this too, AFTER the killing sprees, the cannon, the tortures,  the fraud of Kansas Act.

They did Kansas Act first --it almost worked, as you will see. But people fought back, Atchison and Davis did not expect that.   When Kansas Act failed to bring about slavery in all of the West, Davis added the Dred Scott decision.

Now you know more than 95% of US history teachers, regarding that,  which is odd, because this was not only self evident at the time, a man named Abraham Lincoln explained this in more diplomatic terms,  over, and over, and over.

And over.

And over.

Google him.  You may find information about him and his speeches about Kansas Act and Dred Scott.   One of them is called "A House Divided Can Not Stand".


Slave power always spread by killing and violence, but here, Jeff Davis sought to justify the killings on a "legal basis".  The legal basis "  was the Kansas Act And Dred Scott.  

So Davis and others  were not trying to keep it a secret.  They insisted they were right, slavery was a protected right.  And the right to free speech (they made it illegal to preach or publish newspapers against slavery)  had to take back seat to this "right" of slavery. 

 They were bragging out the ass about it.

Spread slavery against (yes, against) state's rights. Because of Kansas Act and Dred Scott. 

  This might sound bizzare to people educated by US text books, or teachers who use them.  Absent from any US text books are such basic things as Southern War Ultimatums,  of 1861 and 1865. 


Southern leaders actually invaded Kansas, set up cannons on the few places you could travel into Kansas by wagon, and tried to keep anyone out who did not take an oath to support slavery.

These were not citizens of Kansas doing this.  These were men hired by Southern leaders, financed by Jeff Davis, and led by the man who passed the Kansas Act -- US Senator David Rice Atchison.

These cannons on the border set off shock waves back east, in Chicago and elsewhere.  People were livid, correctly and passionately upset, that the very people who sold them "Kansas Act"  as a way to let people of Kansas decide the issue themselves, were now hiring and leading the killers in Kansas.  Davis Atchison was that Senator,  and he bragged out the ass, as did others,  about what he was doing and why.

How the hell can we miss this? 

Newspapers were full of the story -- for months. First hand accounts came in -- horrific.  

A US senator spoke on the floor of the Senate for two days, detailing the tortures, the killings -- and he named Atchison and Stephen A Douglas as being behind this.   After the speech he was beaten almost to death on the Senate floor, with Stephen A Douglas standing by laughing.




Do we not teach this. 

If that were not enough, Atchison and his men, and his newspaper, were PROUD of this.  They felt totally justified and in the right.  They were spreading slavery -- for GOD, they said, and for White Survival.

Lincoln pointed this out again, and again, and again, and again. Lincoln actually went to Kansas, and met with many of the men who had fought Atchison's men.   

Lincoln's trip to Kansas was monumentally important -- yet virtually ignored by all teachers and  most "historians".

In Kansas  - Lincoln spoke against slavery where Atchison had made it illegal to do so.  Try to grasp that.

But far more important, Lincoln met with the men (Democrats!) who helped create the Republican party, and arguably won the nomination for Lincoln to run for President.  

These men -- former Democrats -- went to Kansas assuming their friend Jeff Davis and Davis Rice Atchison had told them the truth.  When they got to Kansas, they saw the killings and tortures, and they flipped to be very anti - Atchison, anti -Davis, anti-  Stephen A Douglas.

They were very impressed by Lincoln, and backed him for Presidents. Some of them -- remember this -- were Democrats.

There is not 1 in 1000 US history teachers  that know any of this, much less teach it. WTF?

 Almost every time Lincoln spoke, and he explained it at length, though as politely in public as he could.  He explained the Kansas Act as the first step, and Dred Scott as second, in an attempt to cover the violence with some legal foppery.   The violence came first, did not work, and men like Douglas and Jeff Davis then tried to justify the killings with the frauds of Kansas Act and Dred Scott. 


The "Kansas Act" as part of a violent, contrived, fraud.   And the man who passed Kansas Act, in Washington DC, not only proved that by personally rushing to Kansas to lead the invasion of it, but Atchison would BOAST he was killing to spread slavery "for the entire South".

Charles Sumner speech -- Crimes Against Kansas -- was about Atchison, how he passed Kansas Act, then went to Kansas and started his "rein of terror" that lasted until the Civil War was over, and cultivated in the slaughter, by Southern paid men, of women and children in Lawrence, which they invaded three separate times, the last time essentially doing mass killings. 

If our history text books were not so full of bullshit,  every  child  in our schools would know the most important person during this time was David Rice Atchison,  and his partnership with two others, Stephen A Douglas, and Jefferson Davis.

To tell anyone, ever, in any manner, that the South "cared about state's rights"  is to show profound stupidity of what actually happened. 

How the hell did we as a nation stupidly accept -- which we did -- Jeff Davis own excuses after the war, as fact?

We do literally teach, fundamentally,  Jeff Davis double speak, and we can only do that if teachers and text books simply don't tell who was killing who, and why, 1845-1861.

So much of what happened is  ignored -- stupidly, and essentially fraudulently -- in US text books.  No information about Southern invasions of Kansas 1854 on.  No information about Southern leaders killing sprees in Kansas. No information about the connons.

No information that Jeff Davis sent these killers to Kansas, led by David Rice Atchison, who was bragging about it.

No information about Southern War Ultimatums of 1856 or 1861.

What the F? 



Another totally ignored story is how honest Democrats, who went to Kansas first, and believed the fraud that Kansas Act was "to give people of Kansas the perfect right"  to decide slavery themselves.  



Honest Democrats --like Jim Lane, Reeder, Geary,  the first three governors of Kansas,  actually were supporters of Jeff Davis, Atchison, and Stephen A Douglas, until they got to Kansas and saw the killing sprees by Atchison's men to not only spread slavery by force, but to stop people from even speaking against, or publishing newspapers against, slavery.

How the hell do you miss that?   These men -- remember, Democrats who believed Davis Atchison and Douglas at first, actually helped start the Republican Party, as a direct result of the killing, tortures, and War ULtimatums that you never heard of.

Absent too are the speeches and declarations given at the time -- Southern leaders gave the speeches and issued the declarations -- boasting of spreading the slavery BY KILLING into places and states that were not only against slavery, but were already free states.

How do you not include that?  How do you whitewash what Southern leaders were proud of -- PROUD OF -- until they lost.  They did not admit it, then.  They bragged about it.  Men like Jefferson Davis, and David Atchison, who passed the Kansas Act, bragged of it. 

B R A G G E D.

The Vice President of the Confederacy went on a speaking tour-- to cheering crowds -- explaining in detail that the Confederacy was created to not just spread slavery, but to do God's will and punish the black race for biblical sins. 

He did not admit it, he BOASTED of it.    And if you think he was misunderstood, later in life he explained he helped the reporters at the time get it right!  He was proud of it, later, too.  He was not saying anything unusual, none of these folks bragging of killing or going to war to spread slavery said a thing that was not already clear to the crowds they drew cheers from.

Not my fault your teacher did not tell you. We have allowed -- stupidly -- Southern school boards to dictate what is acceptable to teach.  As a result, they just omitted what Southern leaders did, and bragged about doing -- they killed to spread slavery, and they bragged about it. 


Most teachers tell you the Civil War started in 1861.

On a test, you better say 1861,  or you will be marked wrong. But Southern leaders boasted they were at war --and they called it war to spread slavery -- in 1856.  


Here is a way to test anyone who claims to teach US history, or the US Civil War.

Ask them what Southern War Ultimatums were, in 1856, and again in 1861. 

If they don't know,  they almost certainly do not know the basics of US Civil War,  because the Southern War Ultimatums are fundamental to understanding anything else.

Even if they never heard of those Southern War ULtimatums issued in those years, they should know enough to guess what they were, because the actions of 1856 and 1861 reflect those war ultimatums. 


Southern leaders explained it, before the Civil War,  and even during the Civil War -- why they were at war.  

Jefferson Davis even wrote official declarations "To the People of the Free States"   so that "there would be no misunderstanding in the future".

With multiple Southern leaders -- top leaders -- officially and unofficially, loud and proud,  clear and distinct,  explaining it, why on earth have we not taught that?

 Not just their words --the boasting was less important than what they were doing.   And what they were doing (and bragging of)  was killing  to spread slavery.



For example, Southern leaders from Missouri, using paid men, had cannon set up in at key points on the border of Kansas and Missouri,  to stop anyone against slavery from even entering Kansas. 

HOW THE HELL  is that overlooked? 

It was not overlooked then, it changed everything. When word got back to Chicago and the East that Southern leaders were actually blocking access to KS, killing and torturing folks who refused to agree to be proslavery, there was outrage, and dramatic speeches by Democrats who had been to Kansas, saw first hand what was going on, and not only helped start the Republican party because of it, but from that point on were dedicated to fight back against the killers sent by SOuthern leaders.

Lincoln's amazing "Lost Speech"  came about precisely because of the information from these DEMOCRATS who reported on the violence led by Southern leaders.  Men like Jim Lane, for one.

  I doubt there are four "history professors" in the US that can even tell you the reaction to those Southern leaders using canon in Kansas to stop anyone against slavery from even getting into Kansas.

So "history professors"  don't know what actually led to the creation of Republican party -- aided by DEMOCRATS who had been to Kansas and saw what was going on.

How the hell can our country know our history if the "history teachers" don't? 

   The leader of those men was David Rice Atchison, US Senator, who passed Kansas Act in Senate, then personally rushed to Kansas to terrorize, and later kill, to spread slavery not just into Kansas, but into all of the West, including into states that were already free states. 

Let's be very clear.  They were not killing to KEEP slavery.  Not killing to maintain slavery.  Or to have slavery where it was "wanted".  They were killing to SPREAD, SPREAD slavery.   

This is not hard. It is not mysterious.  Southern leaders themselves bragged out the ass about it, until they lost.

So stop already -- if you are a history teacher -- from ever telling anyone that Southern leaders cared about state's rights, because factually, and proudly, Southern leaders were killing to STOP states rights.

And the "legal basis" for these killing sprees, according to them as the time, was Kansas Act and Dred Scott.

Davis explained, then, and after the war, that Kansas resistance to slavery was "intolerable".

Remember -- 95% of the citizens (white male residents) of Kansas were against slavery, and voted against slavery by such margins repeatedly.

Yet Davis paid for over 1000 men, mostly from Texas, South Carolina and Alabama, to invade Kansas, repeatedly, from 1856 on.

The first two invasions of Kansas, Davis had US Senator David Rice Atchison in charge.   Atchison and Davis both boasted -- boasted -- they "using force of arms"  to spread slavery.

And yes, they both knew exceedingly well that Kansas citizens were overwhelmingly against slavery -- -that is why  they sent over 1000 men, and eventually, over 2000 men, first to just terrorize, later to kill, to spread slavery. 

After the South lost -- Davis personally still defended sending Atchison and the 2000 men to Kansas before Lincoln even ran for Senate.  Davis said everything Atchison had done (terrorizing and killing)  was "Constitutionally required".
So it's important you know what Atchison did. 

It is important to notice that Atchison's first invasion of Lawrence Kansas,  where he bragged of killing to spread slavery "for the entire South"   was in 1856.


In any other war in history, you would assume that those boasting of starting the war (as they did) and boasted of specific official reasons for the war,  would be part of the study of the war.

Turns out, that's not how it worked in US text books.  And as a result, that's not how most Americans see the Civil War.

Most folks are schocked to find out Southern leaders were killing to SPREAD slavery specifically, and proudly, where slavery was not- - not -- not -- wanted.

And they knew it was not wanted.   The only hope they had to push slavery into these areas was by killing.

Not sorta.  Not kinda. Not "in a way".  Not "if you want to see it that way".   This is what was going on -- and we have simply allowed Southern school boards, to an astonishing extent, not just to put absurdities in their school text books, but because of how text book publishing works, all text books in the US whitewashed, mostly by simply omission, what the Southern leaders were doing and bragging about, until they lost. 

"SO THERE WILL BE NO MISUNDERSTANDING IN THE FUTURE."   Jefferson Davis's official declaration of  1863.

And that came after repeated boasting by Davis and others about killing to spread slavery,  and (this is important, so pay attention)  to spread slavery against -- that's right against -- state's rights.


Not sorta.  Not "kinda".  Not "in a way".  Not "well if you want to look at it that way.  Bluntly, proudly,  clearly, loudly.  they bragged they were killing to spread ( S P R E A D )  slavery.

So, why don't we teach what they did, and what they bragged of doing, until they lost?

Good question. 

As you will see, there is an abundance of documents and  speeches where Southern  leaders bragged-- bragged -- they were killing to spread slavery. 

Even Jeffery Davis, himself, officially, made it abundantly, ridiculously clear, he would kill to spread slavery North.

Not some "gotcha" quote, or some emotional outburst.   Davis's official proclamation was a surprise to no one, it was much like the hundreds of speeches by various Southern leaders from 1854 on. 

Why is it that virtually no high school, and few college, history teachers know that Jefferson Davis boasted of killing to spread slavery, and spread it against -- against -- states rights.

It was not just bragging about it -- you need to understand this.   These men did not issue idle threats.  In each case, they were already doing what they were boasting about.  Davis even wrote it was saying this "so there would be no misunderstanding in the future".

Later, though, after the South lost, it was a completely different story, by every single person who previously boasted of killing to spread slavery.   To a man, they did a complete about face, claiming, no no no, you had us all wrong.  We were for STATE'S RIGHTS!

Stupidly, to an astonishing extent, our schools,our historians,  repeat various excuses and bullshit  made up after the civil war,  as the true account of the Civil War.

History teachers, therefore,  don't mention, or mention so obliquely, so offhandedly, that generations of Americans learn essentially nonsense, instead of the facts.  Southern leaders killed to spread slavery, and they bragged about it, till they lost. 

In fact, when you listen to Southern leaders, they saw several wars, including the Civil War itself, at the time, as wars to spread slavery.  You need to read their own speeches to grasp that, and this will sound preposterous to you.   The Civil War was a war to SPREAD SLAVERY?

To the men who started it, who bragged they started the civil war (yes, they bragged about starting the war, as you will see) it was very much to spread slavery.  Not to merely continue slavery, to keep slavery where it was,   but to physically and violently SPREAD slavery.

This is not overstating it -- Southern leaders themselves made this clear.  The leaders who actually "did the doing"  like Jefferson Davis and David Rice Atchison, boasted about it.... until they lost. 

And spread it -- against states rights. 


In fact, Jeff Davis said it himself -  he boasted of invading the North to enslave blacks in the NORTH, and went on to explain, he issued that official proclamation so "there will be no misunderstanding in the future."

Davis pride about killing to spread slavery NORTH was no surprise to anyone, North or South.  He had already sent killers to Kansas almost 10 years before that, for the same purpose. 

In fact, Davis was Secretary of War, when he personally sent US Senator Atchison to Kansas, and personally went with Atchison and Stephen Douglas to get President Pierce to sign the Kansas Act.

Within a few weeks, Atchison was in Kansas leading men to terrorize in Kansas citizens from voting, or even speaking, against slavery.

That US Senator, with Stephen A Douglas, got the Kansas Act passed, claiming the legislation would allow the people of Kansas to be "perfectly free" to decide slavery for themselves.


How well known was this at the time?

Charles Sumner gave a two day speech about Atchison and his men, make it clear to the nation and the future, what Atchison had done.  He had passed the Kansas Act, then went to Kansas, and hired hundreds of men to kill and torture.  

For two days Sumner laid out dozens of killings and tortures done by Atchison's men. 

After the speech,  Sumner was beaten almost to death.

Do you see the drawing above  about the beating issued at the time?   Do you see the man laughing as Sumner was beaten?

That man laughing was Atchison's partner in Kansas -- Nebraska Act, Stephen A Douglas. 

Because of what Atchison and Douglas did, a guy you may have heard about got back in politics.

His name was Abraham Lincoln.

Hundreds, thousands, of other things happened because of what Atchison and Douglas did- their Kansas Act started it all.

 So if you don't know what Atchison did (and he did a lot) and what happened because of what he did,  you pretty stupid about the US Civil War.


Remember  this ..they didn't admit it, they bragged about it. Officially, repeatedly, clearly,  loudly and proudly.

Very basic -- you should have learned this in grade school...Southern leaders were very proud of it then, officially and unofficially, as you will see. 

So explain to me why anyone -- North or South -- who is educated in the United States does not know that Southern leaders not only killed to spread slavery -- they bragged out the ass they killed to spread slavery.

Not sort of. Not a few nuts.  

The top leaders, officially, not only sent killers to kill and terrorize folks to accept slavery, they boasted in 1856 they were at war to spread slavery.







Only when you know all the basic facts can you have any rational narrative about it.  

Here are basic facts -- words and actions by Southern leaders boasting of it -- showing Southern leaders were killing to spread slavery, from 1847 on.

Southern leaders even sent paid killers to Kansas in 1856, led in person by the US Senator who just passed the Kansas Act.  His name was David Rice Atchison, and he worked officially for Jefferson Davis. 

You could make any narrative, any story,  any spin you want, and convince anyone else of it, no matter how  absurd, false, partly true, even exactly backwards from the truth that narrative was, if you did not know or include the basic facts.

The people killed and tortured, the slaves whipped, sold, bought, even killed, don't seem to matter. Of course that is not the intent of those putting out goofy narratives.  Yet that can be the result.

Southern leaders actions from 1840 to 1861 surely would be basic,  such as any killing sprees, any paid killers sent to kill,  any boasting by Southern leaders about such killings,  and about such hired men.

Very likely you learned more about Confederate belt buckles than  you did about Southern leaders boasting about killing to spread slavery, until they lost. 


LET THE SOUTH RESPOND - they said at the time.

Let the SOUTH respond --- and they did.  They made it very very clear.  They were killing to spread slavery.....Period.   And spread it even against --- yes against -- state's rights  

Slavery was ordained -- ordered-- by GOD himself.  It is not up to man to question GOD,  Robert E Lee said.  And Lee was very typical,  God ordained slavery,  Abolitionists, Lee said, were "trying to destroy the American church".  

War Ultimatums, official and unofficial speeches, Southern leaders at the time, in their own books, their own documents, their own newspapers, boasted of things that -- stupidly -- not only don't we teach in our history text books,  but we do NOT include these facts whatsoever in our narrative.

LINK    Senator Atchison's speech to his hired killers, paid for by Jeff Davis. 1856. Remember the date -- 1856.  

Lincoln had not even run for Senate yet.

Had not even debated Douglas yet.   Try to grasp that.  

Before Lincoln even ran for Senate, Southern leaders were IN Kansas killing to spread slavery, and calling it a war to spread slavery.

 They should know, right?  Southern leaders, at the time, who were actually doing it, at the time?   They -- they -- were the ones boasting.  They were the ones bragging about it.  '

Do you think they were kidding?

Southern leaders ALREADY calling it a war to spread slavery, at the time, and boasted as such by the leaders who were doing it. 



So when your history teacher gets up, and later asks questions about the Civil War on tests,  they usually teach what can only be "stupid notions".      If your facts are basically wrong - in this case, by omitting Southern killing sprees, War Ultimatums,  Southern leaders boasting of killing to spread slavery, etc,  it is therefore impossible, not difficult, but impossible,  to teach actual history.

It would be better to teach nothing that teach the bullshit we do teach.    These goofy lessons in our text books have not just become accepted,   Southern folks seem upset that anything gets in about slavery at all.  Or they blame others.

And why would they do otherwise?  They don't know.

No one told them either. 


This is by no means limited to the Civil War.   We have done a horrible job teaching the Vietnam war, too.  And the Mexican War -- maybe the worst of all.   It was an open secret, admitted to by Henry Clay, Southern leader, that the US attack on Mexico was entirely done to double the size of slavery.


The point is, any notion that Lincoln's election caused the Civil War, or caused the South to secede,  is stupid.   Yet it's taught in just about every school and every college in the US.

It's stupid because the war was ALREADY going on, and the slave power folks, like Davis and Atchison, had a nearly five  year head start.  And they were bragging -- bragging about it.

Why even have a question of why the South seceded?  They made it clear -- they were ALREADY at war to spread slavery, but they were using the federal government to spread it for them as much as they could.

Lincoln, of course, was not about to help them spread slavery -- though look below, that was essentially their War Ultimatums of 1861.  This shows  how bizzare and audacious Southern leaders had become. They issued War Utltimatums -- not suggestions -- that the federal government must HELP them force slavery into Kansas, which had already become a free state by  95% vote.

Let me repeat that, the most insane War Ultimatum of all time -- the federal government must HELP the South spread slavery into  Kansas,  a free state, and a free state because they voted 95% against slavery.


The Southern War Ultimatums -- war was promised if Lincoln did not obey -- was that the federal government had to HELP FORCE SLAVERY INTO KANSAS.





Of course Lincoln was not going to do that.

Kansas was already a free state.

Why not teach the Southern War Ultimatums?   Southern leaders were PROUD of it!    Proud!  It made perfect sense to them, they  had been killing to spread slavery for years, and was hell bent for leather to continue.  

SO when Lincoln got elected, they didn't just say "Okay".   Instead, the leaders issued War Ultimatums, and attacked 12 places, not just one. Not just Fort Sumter-- they attacked 12 places, and made it very clear,  by their own war ultimatums,  what they wanted.

They wanted what they had always wanted, the spread of slavery. 

Do you think Lincoln was going to HELP the killers kill Kansas citizens who had rejected slavery?

But that was the nature of Southern War Ultimatums of 1861,  just so you know how goofy Southern leaders were.

And by the way -- again -- Jeff Davis actually wrote proudly in his own book that the resistance of slavery into Kansas was so horrible, it was intolerable. 


Are you starting to grasp what Lincoln was up against?

 Lincoln not only repeatedly exposed Kansas Act and Dred Scott, dozens if not hundreds of times, Lincoln would not, as President, stand by as previous Presidents had,and let Southern leaders kill to spread slavery, as they were doing.


Southern leaders were already sending paid killers to Kansas, and bragging -- bragging -- they were at war to spread slavery.

And spread it against -- against -- state's rights and popular sovereignty, as you will see. 

Just one of many speeches, boasts, documents, declarations by Southern leaders -- until they lost.



For all practical purposes,  in our education and awareness of the US Civil War, Southern leaders never sent over 2000 killers to Kansas in 1856.  They never issued War Ultimatums promising endless wars to spread slavery to all of the US -- all the way to the Pacific, and into the North.

(Yes, Southern leaders boasted of killing to spread slavery all the way to the Pacific, and into the North, and they tried to bring that to pass, as you will see).

For practical purposes, in our education,  Southern leaders, including Jeff Davis did not write in his own declarations and in his own book that the "intolerable grievance"   that justified Civil War and sending killers to Kansas years before Lincoln even ran for the Senate, never happened.  

Out of text books, out of sight, out of lectures, out of testing, out of mind.

So while a high school teacher might do a great job instructing his or her students about specific dates and about names of US Forts and battle places,  that teacher simply can not, no matter what their intentions, no matter what their level of education, show the students the basics of what happened from 1840 to 1861 that caused the Civil War.



It is ironic -- Jeff Davis would be shocked, and so would Lincoln -- that no text book in the USA even mentions, much less had an entire chapter on, Southern War ultimatums of 1854 and 1861.  Ironic because Southern leaders did all they could at the time to make those War Ultimatums known, though after they war, they were eager to whitewash what they had boasted of earlier. 




So watch what happens when you in INCLUDE, instead of ignore or minimize,  the understanding of the US Civil War when we include what Southern leaders did -- who they killed, what they bragged about, what they themselves issued as War Ultimatums, and what they explained to each other, and to the world AT THE TIME.

Not the bullshit made up later. I mean what Southern leaders did and boasted of THEN,  what they were proud of, so proud the went to great lengths to make it known.  They did not hide it, they were not ashamed of it, they did not mince words.


# 1 FACT 

It might come as a surprise, even to your history teacher in college, that the man who passed Kansas Act in the US Senate then went to Kansas personally, hired men to terrorize, later hired more men to kill, and invaded Kansas to make sure the Kansas citizens could not vote, or even speak publicly, against slavery.

Yet that man, with his partner Stephen A Douglas, had repeatedly sold Kansas Act as a way to allow the citizens of Kansas (white males, that is) to be "perfectly free"  to decide their "own institutions."

Southern leaders had just demanded, and got, a doubling of the land for slavery in the "Compromise"  of 1850.  As Lincoln said "what compromise?".    The South demanded they double the land for slavery, taking all of what the US stole from Mexico, to do so. 

In "return"  the South promised to keep slavery "down there".  Below a certain line.

Then -- just two years later, the South demanded MORE land for slavery.   And to get that land, they had Stephen A Douglas and David Rice Atchison pass the Kansas Act -- they said this would allow Kansas folks to vote about slavery.

So -- when Atchison himself led the killers to repeatedly invade Kansas, everyone -- including Lincoln -- knew exactly what was going on.'

Too bad your "history" teacher was too stupid, or too badly informed, to see this most basic thing possible from that entire century.  That  the Kansas Act, as Lincoln said over, and over and over, was a monumental fraud.

Indeed it was. 




The killers were led by this man.  David Atchison, who had just weeks before he started terrorizing in Kansas, had passed the Kansas Act in the US Senate, and personally went with Jeff Davis to get the Kansas Act signed.

The other person to go with Davis and Atchison to get Kansas Act signed -- Atchison's partner, Stephen A Douglas.

Jeff Davis had actually tried to use the US Army to do the dirty work in Kansas, when he was Secretary of War.   The officers in Kansas would -- as Davis ordered -- break up meetings and disperse crowds who tried to form to vote against slavery and become a free state.

But those soldiers would not kill, they would not terrorize.  They were ordered to break up lawful meetings, and they did as ordered. They would not do more.  

That is why Atchison had to hire men -- from Missouri at first, then from Texas, South Carolina, and Alabama mostly.  He put ads in various Southern papers to get them to come to Kansas "The time to talk" was over  Atchison said in those ads.   

And Atchison told them they would be "well paid".

See  his speech to them!

OF STATE'S RIGHTS --1856-1865

Atchison sent reports to Jeff Davis on the progress of his killings in Kansas.

Atchison burned almost all of his papers during the Civil War, but some remain, like his ads in Southern papers offering money for men to come to Kansas to violently spread slavery.

Like a report to Jeff Davis on the progress of the killings.

Like Atchison speech to the men he hired, just before their first invasion of Lawrence.

Remember -- Atchison was the US Senator who passed the Kansas Act, supposedly to allow Kansas citizens to vote on slavery.  Then Atchison personally went to Kansas, and made sure they could not vote against slavery. 

You know more basic history of Kansas and the Civil War,  than many history teachers do. 

I'm not kidding.  Absolutely no "history expert"  I met at Civil War meetings, at special libraries about Civil War,  etc,  knew this most basic  fact. How the hell were they not taught?

Let me show you how famous it was THEN, okay?

It was damn famous....


Your teacher will know -- the PhD's will know -- that Senator Sumner was beaten on the floor of the US Senate, almost to death, for a two day speech.   In fact, your teacher may even assign you to report on that speech, may have it on tests.   He or she may act all smug about knowing it.

But maybe they should actually read it themselves.  Sumner, the entire speech, 100% of the speech, every word, in the two day speech, he was telling about ONE thing.


He was telling about David Rice Atchison, after  he passed Kansas Act, immediately left for Kansas, and there terrorized, later killed and tortured to spread slavery.

Just what I told you above, is what Senator Sumner was telling the US Senate, for two days, in detail,  very very clear details of killings and tortures -- by Atchison's men, after he passed Kansas Act, and then left immediately for Kansas.

Now -- your teacher should thank you for filling in this basic void in their understanding.

But they won't. 


THE FLIP FLOP ON STATES RIGHTS....  no one told you about.

Today there is this silly notion, often repeated by smug "history" teachers  that the civil war was a "dispute"  over state's rights vs slavery.

Not really.    The pro slavery folks did mention state's rights a before 1851,  but when KS folks rejected slavery, and tried to enter as as free state, all that changed.

Southern leaders did an immediate and violent flip flop to be against -- against --the rights of people in Kansas to decide slavery.   Specifically, Jeff Davis sent killers to Kansas to stop them from voting against slavery.

And Davis was proud of that.  Proud too, were the men he sent to stop Kansas whites from rejecting slavery.

US text books, stupidly, have never even mentioned, much less made clear this was fundamental to the Civil War  ---  South's violent attack  on state's rights to reject slavery.

Not sorta.  Not kinda.  Not a few "nuts".  Not out of context.  

Jeff Davis did all he could during that time to explain this. He was not quiet it about, why should your history teacher not know it?  

Why not show what Jeff Davis himself boasted of, and explained?



You could sit through 1000 lectures by history teachers in the US  about Kansas and the Civil War, and not hear one word about Southern War Ultimatums or killing sprees, or that Jeff Davis paid for over 1000 men to invade Kansas to force slavery into Kansas.

And you likely would never hear that the man who led the killers was the very same man who pushed the Kansas Act through the US Senate, and personally got it signed, with Jeff Davis, and Stephen A Douglas.

Nor is that information bluntly stated in any US text book.

Why not? All these men were proud of that, until they lost. 


The ugly truth is not so complicated.

The excuses to white wash what Southern leaders did might sound complicated.

Southern leaders sent over 1000 killers to Kansas in 1856,  issued War Utlatimums, and were killing and torturing to force slavery into Kansas -- against (yes against)  state's rights. By the time Davis and Atchison ran out of money to pay the men, they had paid, apparently, over 2000 men.

There was NOT large number of local Kansas men who wanted to have slaves. In fact, officially the census in 1860 showed only 2 slaves in the entire state.

This was not a group of wealthy slave owners urging the spread of slavery. 


It was largely Jeff Davis and David Rice Atchison  boasting to the public and to each other, that they would spread slavery as an "equal right" into Kansas and beyond, all the way to the Pacific.

Atchison had boasted to cheering crowds he would see Kansas in hell before he would let the state be a free state.

Once hate and fear demagogues, get crowds to cheer, get power, get attention,  they  have never, in all human history, then said "Oh never mind, I was just doing that for attention".

When such men get power, they then get others in motion to DO the things they foolishly boasted of.   Atchison made bombastic speeches at the start of several killing sprees in Kansas, but somehow was gone as the fighting started.

Fighting Atchison hired the men to do, promised to lead them into battle, but then oddly vanished and was not part of the killing personally.

Wars often start this way.

Atchison and Davis, and dozens of others, were then locked and loaded, and could not say "Never mind". 

Even when Kansas became a free state in early 1861,  Southern leaders AGAIN  -- yes AGAIN -- issued War Ultimatums that Kansas must accept slavery.  Let me repeat that, because your "history" teacher has no clue.   After Kansas became a free state, Southern leaders AGAIN issued War Ultimatums, as bragged about by Southern papers.

Southern leaders were not shy, coy, or ashamed. 


YOU ARE TOLD -- in a punk ass, white washed, euphemistic way.   

You might remember, from your high school or college course about "Trouble in Kansas"  and "border ruffians".   Nearly everything the text books do relate would be laughable euphemism if not for the fact these were paid killers, sent to Kansas by Southern leaders, who boasted to them and the public, they were there to kill and terrorize NOT just to spread slaver "For the entire South".....  they were there to silence all speech and newspapers in Kansas from even publishing anti-slavery publications.

You wont find in any US text book that we know of, Jeff Davis official proclamation of spreading slavery into the North. Why not? 

Davis thought it was so important, to tell the NORTH that he was spreading slavery to the North, that he not only wrote that promise.  he had it published in Richmond papers.   See for yourself. 

He would -- by force of arms -- enslave blacks IN THE NORTH.  And then he tried -- yes, he did.  He sent Lee North and indeed, Lee did capture hundreds of free blacks in the North.

Yes, Davis sent Lee NORTH to capture free blacks.   You are lucky indeed if you ever had a teacher that told you that much.  Lee did exactly as told, he did send his men around the country side in the North, capturing hundreds of free blacks.

Then Lee took those blacks -- many of whom were never slaves in their lives ---  into the South and sold them as slaves.

Why is this not known?

So Davis was not just yapping.

He was not just talking big in this official proclamation.  He issued the order to Lee, and Lee did it.


Davis did not just have this published, did not just have blacks in the North captured in the Civil War, taken South, and sold as slaves..... remember he (Davis)  was the guy who sent Atchison to Kansas. 

He (Davis)  was the guy who paid Atchison and his men, according to Atchison himself.

He (Davis)  had officially named Atchison as General of Law and Order, after Atchison, as US Senator passed the Kansas Act, then rushed to Kansas to force slavery into not just Kansas  -- but to all of the West, including California, already a free state.

Remember - remember -- these guys were doing what they boast of doing.  Men were killing each other, because these two men hired or otherwise ordered the men to do so.

So Davis had already paid for over 1000 men to go to Kansas, mostly from Texas, South Carolina and Alabama, to help kill (yes, kill) and terrorize to spread slavery into Kansas.   It was no surprise to anyone, North or South, when Davis ordered Lee to capture free blacks in the North during the Civil War.

That was actually less insane that sending killers to Kansas from 1856 on, to kill other whites to force slavery into the West.  It was all vile stuff -- and Davis boasted of it, even boasted that the people in those areas could NOT reject slavery by their vote, could not reject slavery by legislation,  there was simply no way for them to reject slavery.

And that all -- all -- followed the Kansas Act, which Davis himself, Atchison, and Stephen Douglas, personally took to the President, and had him sign it, all the while telling the President (Pierce)  and the public, that this Kansas Act was going to let people there be "perfectly free"  to decide slavery themselves.

Are you starting to grasp  yet, what Lincoln was up against?


Davis was not at all coy about that till later. He was in fact, quite proud. And loud.

He was not as loud and clear, however, as US Senator Atchison, who personally paid and led the killers once they got to Kansas.   Atchison's speech is below.

Remember, all this time, 90% or more of Kansas residents were against slavery, and voted as such.  Even after repeated votes against slavery, even after Kansas became a free state officially (remember this)  Southern leaders STILL killed, STILL insisted Kansas must be a slave state.


 Southern leaders explained,  in detail, why they were killing, why they were at war. Jeff Davis himself explained it repeatedly and at great length -- see below.

They were killing to spread slavery -- and spread it for GOD. 

Of all the mistakes in how we teach US history, this has to be the most toxic -- and dumbest. 

  Southern leaders did all they could possibly do at the time to boast of this. They issued War Ultimatums.  They sent over 1000 killers to Kansas. They gave speeches boasting of it, the leaders wrote open letters to the public boasting of it. 

Boasting of what?  Boasting of killing to spread slavery for GOD.  

If they themselves thought this was so important to explain -- and explain they did -- why on earth do we not even mention in any clear what what they shouted from the rooftops -- and did.

They did not just kill to spread slavery, from 1856 on, they BRAGGED about it.  And they promised endless war until they spread slavery to all (yes, all) of the US. 

Not all leaders explained and boasted of it the same way  -- but the top leaders like Jeff Davis and David Rice Atchison did a fine job of making it clear, and they were the ones actually doing it, actually causing the wheels to turn, actually paying the killers, actually boasting of it.


  Here are just two of thousands of documents leading up to the Civil War, when Southern leaders boasted of killing to spread slavery.....

US Senator Atchison, boasting of killing to spread slavery, 1856

THING TO REMEMBER:  Atchison is the man who passed the Kansas Act, then immediately went to Kansas to lead hired killers into Kansas to terrorize, later kill, to not only spread slavery, but to arrest or kill those who even spoke publicly against slavery.

Atchison was -- officially --  appointed by Jefferson Davis himself to be "General of Law and Order" in Kansas.   When Davis was asked about Atchison and his men killing and torturing in Kansas, (and boasting of it)  Davis would only say "Everything he did was constitutionally required".

Davis paid the men Atchison hired from Alabama, Texas, and South Carolina. 

Don't believe me?   Keep reading. 

When they lost, Southern leaders and their children gave a profoundly different version of why they started the Civil War --  which is human nature.  It would be stunning if they did otherwise.

After the war, they claimed they had only wanted peace. Davis said he worked tirelessly for "20 years"  to avoid war.   Actually Davis was the guy who, with Atchison, issued War Ultimatums, sent killers to Kansas,  and boasted (yes, he did, see below) that they were killing to spread slavery NORTH, and spread it against state's rights.

Yet to an astonishing extent, in our schools, we teach an absurd narrative that South was somehow for "state's rights".   Nothing could be more goofy.  At the time, Southern leaders were killing and torturing to spread slavery -- long before Lincoln even ran for Senate.  And they bragged they would keep killing, against state's rights, until slavery was spread to the Pacific,   and in the North.

That  only sounds bizarre because our schools do not teach Southern War Ultimatums, killing sprees, and speeches boasting of killing to spread slavery.


150 years of bullshit is enough.


Southern leaders, from 1854 to 1861 were clear, loud, articulate,  and boastful.  They were at war to spread slavery -- spread it.  Spread it into Kansas, where citizens repeatedly voted against slavery by overwhelming percentages -- 40 and 50 to 1 against!

In fact, there was virtually no "organic" or local support for slavery in Kansas or in ANYPLACE the Southern leaders were trying to spread slavery to.

Keep that in mind, in the places that Southern leaders bragged about spreading slavery (Kansas, all of the West, California, Oregon, and in the North)  there was no local support for slavery --quite the reverse.  

People in Kansas were especially hateful of slavery  -- after Atchison terrorized and killed to spread slavery.    Many of those who went to Kansas for the South soon learned Atchison and Davis were lying ****.     In fact the first two governors of Kansas, appointed by Jeff Davis himself, soon saw the tortures, killing by paid killers, and lunacy of Atchison and his men, and rightly turned against Davis and Atchison.

 Essentially all of Atchison's "supporters"  were paid, and from somewhere else.   That's as basic as it gets -- and the reason Atchison and Davis lost. 

 At first, Atchison used Missouri men, paid them, on the first invasion.  But many of those refused to do more, and even those Atchison got later -- from South Carolina, Texas, Alabama, simply left after the money stopped, and after John Brown started fighting back.



Atchison thought -- and bragged -- that a quick action by "men of the South"  would frighten the weak Yankees away. Jeff Davis said the same thing.   A big show of violence would solve this.

Indeed, violence was always how slavery spread in the past anyway.

But a big show of force, and terror, did not work as planned.

Atchison could not get enough men from Missouri to actually kill and torture. So early efforts and mostly terrorizing, failed. Atchison resorted to hiring men by placing ads in newspapers in Texas, South Carolina, and Alabama.


Except for renting billboard space 150 years in advance,  to boast of it, they could not be more clear.  So why -- please tell me why - we have not taught simply what they boasted of?  

Their OWN War Ultimatums are not in any US text book.  How the hell does that happen?  They were proud headlines in Richmond papers at the time.  

Jeff Davis own official boasting, in writing, of killing to spread slavery into the North "by force of our arms"  is not taught.  Yet he was so proud of it at the time, he had it published on front page of Richmond papers.

But more than just boasting, they were doing.   They were doing what they boasted about. 


Have you ever taken a test in US history class, and had to pick out or name Southern War Ultimatums of 1861?  Probably not.   

Did you ever get a question, or learn, about Jeff Davis official boasting of killing to spread slavery NORTH -- and to keep slavery in the North, perpetually?   Meaning, forever?

Probably not.

Why not let the people of Kansas vote?   Supposedly  Atchison and Stephen Douglas "Kansas Act"  was all about letting them vote on slavery.  Douglas admitted repeatedly that 90 to 95% of people in Kansas were against slavery -- so what's the problem?

Yet Atchison rushed -- immediately after passage of Kansas Act -- to Kansas and led the first invasion which prevented honest voting in Kansas, and made it against the law to publish newspapers against slavery (as it was illegal in all Southern states, already).



The above is a very standard type test for high school students after taking a course on the Civil War. No doubt the teacher, and publisher of the book,  assumed the strange, but very common,  narrative that "South cared"  about state's rights.

At the time, Southern leaders not only killed to stop state's rights regarding slavery, they boasted of it, issued War Ultimatums,  and South leaders were very clear.... people of the states and territories had NO RIGHT to decide slavery,   even if 90-95% of the people in Kansas rejected slavery by vote (which they did)  and even after (yes, after) Kansas became a free state officially,  Southern newspapers and leaders demanded, as a war ultimatum(!)  that Kansas be a slave state -- that they "respect and protect slavery".

Nor were these idle words by a few "extremists"    These were the proud and loud words of Jeff Davis and Davis Rice Atchison, both of whom were involved in sending or leading killing sprees in Kansas, and paying for the men from Texas, South Carolina, and Alabama, to come to Kansas to terrorize, and kill. 

This would sound bizzare to entire generations of US history teachers -- almost none of whom were ever taught Southern War Ultimatums, or Jeff Davis official declarations in front page of Southern (Richmond) Newspapers. 

So a  narrative depends entirely on what facts you know -- or in this case, what teachers were told.


Jeff Davis himself, in his own book, Rise and Fall, explained this "logic" that Kansas folks could not vote out slavery, or vote to restrict it at all.   

Territories and states did NOT  -- did NOT --have a right, by popular vote, by their legislature, by any means, to reject slavery, because of Dred Scott decision.  Blacks were not human beings, he explained correctly, per the United States Supreme Court in Dred Scott decision.

 Literally, not human beings.   This is from his book, which you can get free on Google books.  Or at any library.

They, blacks,  were property,. not persons, not human beings.
 And because of that decision, wrote Jeff Davis himself, Kansas citizens must accept slavery, 90% vote against it, accepted as a free state or not, did not matter, per Davis.

 So Davis justified sending the killers to Kansas -- I can't help it that you did not even know he sent killers to KS in 1856, but he did. I can't help it that your teacher doesn't know.   This is what Southern leaders themselves were boasting of then. 

Remember, I did not make this up, these were the words and actions and boasting of Southern leaders THEN.  Later, yes, later they made up some bullshit.  But at the time, they boasted the states had no rights to reject slavery, not in Kansas, and Jeff Davis himself, officially promised, and sent Lee North during the Civil War,  to enslave in the North.

Again, not my fault you were never told.  Here is Jeff Davis official declaration to that effect. Not my fault you teacher did not know.  

It was AFTER the war, after they lost, that they had to come up with this nonsense Orwellian double speak.  They were killing to STOP -- to STOP -- states rights regarding slavery.  Not kinda. Not sorta. Not in away. 

Your teacher probably told you something about "blacks could not be citizens"  which while true,  is a euphemism, an Orwellian double speak.  Blacks could not be HUMAN BEINGS --  per Jeff Davis. NOT HUMAN BEINGS. NOT PERSONS BUT PROPERTY.

By Davis logic -- the logic he used to send killers to Kansas in 1856 was this:  blacks are not human beings = the government must (must) protect that property = sending killers and causing the Civil War was justified.   

Justified 1856 killing sprees, by 1857 ruling.

One  absurdity in Jeff Davis book is his excuse that Dred Scott justified sending killers to KS in 1856

The Dred Scott decision did not even come out until 1857.  

But Davis never cared what the facts were, though he knew them well.  He made sure his readers did not know. You better know your stuff when you read Davis.  Few people in US history have been as clever and smooth as he at making torture and killing seem like "Southern rights" --- all by "forgetting" to mention all the facts.

But how many people are smart enough to spot that?  Surprisingly not many.

The point is not what year Dred Scott came out, the point is Southern leaders were killing to spread slavery and bragged about it. 

 States rights?  Southern leaders hated states rights when that got in their way to spread slavery  -- even when 90 or 95% of the citizens rejected slavery, that did not matter. 

It was not because slave owners urged killers go to Kansas. 

There was not a public sentiment in the South to send killers or send anyone to Kansas.  This was entirely the machinations of remarkably few men,   mainly three.   David Atchison, Jefferson Davis, and Stephen A Douglas, each for their own reasons.

Remember this -- they sent killers to Kansas BECAUSE they knew very well that 90% and 95% of whites there were against slavery.  They did not send people to negotiate. They did not send people to convince, or to run for office.

They sent killers.  Don't get this confused.  Stephen A Douglas over and over and over, sold this as "popular sovereignty"  to the point he said that so often and at such great length that he is now known, absurdly, as the great champion of popular sovereignty. 

But when you learn all he did -- it's very clear, Douglas was not just in on the ruse to invade Kansas to quickly and violently push slavery into the West,  but that he personally wrote and changed the legislation several times to bring that to pass.

And, as Lincoln himself pointed out (how do "historians" miss this?) it was clear by what Douglas did, he and the others had two parts to this fraud, from the outset.  Kansas Act and Dred Scott.


Davis insisted everything Atchison did in Kansas (meaning the killing, tortures,  terrorizing, passing laws to make speaking against slavery a crime)  was "Constitutionally required" because the citizens had no right to reject slavery.

Not only did they have no right to reject slavery, they had no right to speak against slavery or publish anti-slavery newspapers.  When Atchison got control of Kansas through terror and his "bogus legislature"  he quickly made it against the law to publicly advocate freedom for blacks, or to publish anti slavery newspapers.

In fact, Atchison's 2nd invasion of Kansas, he boasted, was because they had violated his laws against a newspaper publishing articles against slavery. He did not admit it, he boasted of it.  


Even after 1861,  Kansas folks -- though they had become a free state -- could not -- could not -- reject slavery per Jeff Davis.   It was so offensive, so horrible, that Kansas citizens rejected slavery, wrote Davis, that it was the "intolerable grievance"  that justified what Atchison did, and the Civil War. 

And your teacher does not likely know that 95% of the white people in Kansas were very much against slavery -- so much against it, they fought Atchison and Davis men, and many of them died in the process.   They were VERY anti slavery, and Davis knew it.

They sent the killers to Kansas because they knew Kansas citizens were against slavery.   Try to keep that in mind.  It's important.

Your teacher probably does not know Jeff Davis actually made it clear in writing that the resistance to slavery in Kansas was the INTOLERABLE GRIEVANCE.   And that was the justification for both the killers in Kansas, and the Civil War.  The killing in Kansas was just one of the killing sprees. 

Sounds like bullshit?   Well, it's not,  and they made it very clear, themselves, at the time. In fact, they were proud as hell about it-- until they lost.

Nothing is more basic re the US Civil War than Southern killing sprees, 1854 on, and Southern leaders boasting of killing to spread slavery 1855 on.   It was common knowledge, at the time, and Southern leaders were proud about it,.

Why don't we teach what Southern leaders themselves saw as so important, they not only bragged about it, they issued official declarations -- to the future --so there would be "no misunderstanding in the future"  per Jeff Davis himself.

So -- why don't we teach this -- why do 99% of US high school and college teachers seem oblivious to these documents and speeches?

Good question.


Not sorta, not kinda.  Not in a way.  As basic as basic gets.

They started the war to spread -- spread -- spread -- slavery. Not preserve, not keep -- to SPREAD slavery. 

Not some "nuts" in a bar.  South's top leaders, including Jefferson Davis, at the time, boasted they were killing to spread slavery.  They were not trying to convince folks, not trying to persuade folks by reason or logic, or even by religion.    They killing and torturing to spread slavery. 

Why the hell don't we teach this? 




To an astonishing extent, the speech by US Senator David Rice Atchison contains the best single candid boasting of killing to spread slavery "for the entire South"

ATCHISON'S CROWD CHEERED.... a crowd of hired men from Texas and South Caroline, 1856... this was the actual start of the US Civil War.  


Atchison declared this was not only war -- it was war to spread slavery, and "for the entire South".    As you will see,  Atchison was acutely aware (that is why he was in Kansas) that the overwhelming number of citizens of Kansas were profoundly against slavery.   He did not even pretend to advocate by logic, by compromise, by reason, to spread slavery.  There was only one reason -- slave power had the guns and audacity to go to war to spread slavery. 


because I got tired waiting for someone else to show this...







Stupidly, we simply do not teach what Southern leaders themselves, over and over and over, clearly, emphatically, proudly boasted of, until they lost.

Big mistake. 

They did not just speak -- Atchison's hired men that cheered this speech immediately went off to kill and terrorize. 

Not sorta. Not kinda. Not in a way.  This is what happened, and Southern leaders were proud of it  --Atchison said he was "joyous" about it.    Read his speech -- joyous!

Until they lost. 


The single most important speech, arguably,  was by David Rice Atchison, who was speaking to his paid killers from Texas and South Carolina and Alabama.  The speech was in Kansas.   Atchison, with money from Jeff Davis, had hired the men, many by placing ads in Southern papers.  Atchison made it clear "the time for talk was over". 

It was time for war.  A war "for all the South"  he told them.
It was clear that the overwhelming number of white males in Kansas were against slavery. Atchison said he "will see Kansas in hell" before he allows it to be a free state.

You should really stop now and read that speech.

Immediately after the speech, the men raced off to Lawrence Kansas, in one of three invasions of that city.    Why Lawrence?   That city had allowed -- after Atchison made it a crime to publish anything against slavery -- the newspaper there to publish articles against slavery.

That was against the law.  Atchison's law, one he passed with his own hired men from Missouri.  But Atchison needed more men, so he  hired over 1000 from slave states. 

And it almost worked.



So why the fuck don't we teach it?  I seriously want to know.  

Remember, because it's almost certain your history teacher does not, or did not make it clear.  Atchison is the guy who got Kansas Act passed, then rushed to Kansas and started terrorizing, latter killing, to spread slavery.

This was not some trivial incident. This was over years, it was violent, and the entire country then was focused on it.  No one was stupid about this -- as Atchison said, if they can push slavery into Kansas, they will push it to all of the West, including into California and Oregon already free states. 

Survivors of the first invasion of Lawrence, later in life.

It is a profound and absurd feature of US history education that this picture is not recognized instantly by every US history teacher.

I doubt, unless they saw it here, that ANY US history teacher can identify this picture.


Southern leaders thought it was important the public,  then and in the future,  knew they were killing to spread slavery -- and spread it against state's rights.

Let me repeat that-- far from denying it, at the time, Southern leaders (as we show) bragged about it.  As Jefferson Davis himself said "so there will be no mistake in the future".

They were killing to SPREAD -- SPREAD slavery.  Not sorta, not kinda, not "in a way".   They were at war, killing to spread slavery, and spread it specifically against state's rights.


I know it sounds odd, but at the time, before they lost, Southern leaders were emphatic, clear, articulate, in writing, in person,  in documents.... they were at war  (yes, at war) to spread slavery and spread it against state's rights.

I can't help it that you were never told this.   I can't help it you had high school, maybe even college, teachers who seemed smart, and they told you the Civil War was complex, didn't they?

They told you there was a "conflict"  between states rights,  the difference in economics,  the difference in cultures.   It all sounds so smart.  

But it was not complicated to the men boasting of killing to spread slavery -- and bragging about it.

No -- not a few nuts in a bar. No, not a few overzealous guys who got "carried away" in a speech out of context.

I am talking in context, repeatedly, over time.  Speeches by Southern leaders explaining it to the public and for the future -- at the time.

 Jeff Davis is one of the Southern leaders that went out of his way, specifically, to explain then and into the future, they were spreading slavery by force.   See  his OWN official document that he himself issued January 3, 1863, in response to Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation.

Davis even articulated -- he was making this clear now, in January  of 1863,  so "there would be no misunderstanding in the future".


A bit about me..... 

My name is Mark Curran.  Here I am in China, learning Tai Chi, near Hong Kong. 

I'm not an "historian" --- my degree was in political science. 

I did, however, develop a passion about 20 years ago for Southern newspapers, Southern documents, Southern speeches, mostly from before the Civil War,   I started the quest to read about my family in the past.

I had no idea -- zero -- that I would find, over and over and over, in those Southern documents, those Southern speeches and newspapers, boasting of killing to spread slavery for God.   Boasting of endless killing -- by Southern leaders themselves.

This documents were NOT  by others trying to show how violent and ISIS like Southern leaders were, these were their own papers, at the time. Not isolated ramblings, by a few nuts. But repeated, incontext, proud and loud boasting by the leaders themselves. I never heard any of this in high school or college.....I was never told about this is any of the "history books"  I ever read.  WTF?

What I found kept surprising me so much --like Southern War Ultimatums and Southern leaders proud speeches about spreading slavery for GOD, as they were killing to spread slavery for GOD, I had to take another look at those "historians" I so admired, and read, like James McPherson,  Eric Foner, Bruce Catton,  and Shelby Foote.

What the fuck, guys?  How did you miss this?

These "historians" were not always wrong,  but they seemed most eager to give us bullshit.  There were some outright deceptions (by Shelby Foote, most of all)  but mostly, these historians espoused what ended up,  in total,to be almost  nonsensical narratives meant to make THEM, the historian, look knowledgeable, which is perfectly human nature. 

It seems, however, that the tendency of many (by no means all)  well known "historians" is to give us a narrative, when  even if that means they must contrive, and essentially omit, basic facts that would demolish their narrative....that's what they do.

For example, the goofy notion that by an otherwise bright guy at Yale,  Stephen Bright,  the South cared about "states rights" .   Seriously, what part of Jeff Davis and other's bragging about their violence to PREVENT and destroy state's rights did he not know about?

Did Bright think Atchison and Davis were kidding?  

Did he think those who died or were tortured were in on the act?

How the hell did he miss it?  Southern leaders actually boasted of killing -- and killed- - to stop states rights.  

People who teach the US Civil War, or anything about US history, should know this -- and know it backwards and forwards, there is plenty of SOUTHERN documents, speeches, books to substantiate by them boasting of it.  And of course, the killing sprees, the wars, the Ultimatums themselves.

That's rather like a math teacher professing to know math well enough to teach it, and not know the multiplication tables. It's that much of a handicap to teach what actually happened.


The "big historians"  of my life have done a miserable, almost stupid, job of covering this.   And this is basic.

For example McPherson, as far as I can tell, mentioned Southern War Ultimatums a total of once.   Once.

Foote and Bruce Catton, never mentioned it once that I know.    They gave copious attention to trivia and bullshit, but could not find room to show Southern War Ultimatums?

None of these guys could find room for one clear sentence -- that the man who passed Kansas Act then, according Charles Sumner (and according to the clear facts at the time)  went to Kansas, started terrorizing and later killing and torturing to spread slavery -- and spread it against state's rights.

McPherson never told you what those War Ultimatums were!  He mentioned them once, but never explained them?\


Was the his stupidity, or dishonesty?

Because these are simple facts.   Jeff Davis wrote about this in his OWN book.    Davis boasting about invading the North and enslaving all blacks IN THE NORTH is in his own official papers.

The War Ultimatums McPherson even mentioned -- but that's it.  Why not tell the boys and girls what these War Ultimatums were?  Jesus, what a POS he is.

  Stupidly McPherson actually uses the inept and even more stupid narrative by a man I used to admire -- Bruce Catton.   Right on McPherson's Civil War big book, he actually writes "narrative by Bruce Catton".

Bruce Catton was a horribly inept "historian"  --  he essentially just wrote from Jeff Davis crazy point of view, that the South was for state's rights.

No- - no -- no.    Southern leaders explained it very well at the time -- and only came up with the state's rights lie later, after they lost.

As I showed, at the time, for years, as they were killing,  as they were invading, as they were torturing to spread slavery (and boasting of it)  they were quite proud of that.

Catton had --really -- no clue.   DO you know why?   

Because he never read those speeches.

Because he never read those War ULtimatums.

He simply never knew any of it, because Catton took his "facts' almost straight from, of all people, Jefferson Davis.

And McPherson stupidly uses Catton's BS, which is Jeff Davis bs. 

Catton was a trivia buff.  He was into battles, who came to this point on Thursday, where did they go next, what messages went to who.

That's TRIVIA.  Catton had no clue, apparently, what the hell Atchison was doing,  nor did he seem to have a clue who passed Kansas Act, or why.

So was McPherson stupid or dishonest about how  he handled the reasons for the Civil War.

Well, I don't think he was stupid. 


Lincoln sure knew what the War Ultimatums were.   The South had made it very, very clear, in writing and in speeches and in their own newspapers.

Lincoln had to proceed -- and so he did -- on the basis of SOuthern leaders actions. Lincoln did not have the luxury of acting as if these inept "historians"   narrative was true.  He had to deal with the War Ultimatums, the killing sprees,  and the boasts of killing to spread slavery for God.

 Southern leaders boasting of killing to spread slavery for GOD, and acting on those boast, by literally killing to spread slavery for GOD,  should have been front and center, because it was most certainly front and center to them at the time, and they boasted about that.

They didn't deny it--they boasted about it. Boasted about it "out the ass"  until they lost. 

Now, back to regularly scheduled programming....



If Southern leaders at the time thought it was important enough to boast about, why on earth should our history books and "historians"  hardly mention that at all??

Because it goes against the memes they take as gospel.  The silly and entirely wrong meme that South cared about state's rights.   Here is a clue, even without the documents I show you -- men who torture women, sell children, and burn to death men who fight against being enslaved,  do not - do not -- care about rights at all.   They care about power.

Yes -- earlier, at times, Southern leaders sometimes used "states rights"  as an excuse for vile things. They never believed any of it.  

But they got rid of "state's rights"  when Kansas rejected slavery.


Remember, Southern leaders were loud and proud of this, they did not mumble, they did not parse words,   they were boasting of it. 

Slavery always -- always -- spread this way, by force.

One reason the public, and many "history teachers"  are so stupid about this (yes, they are stupid about this)  is that they assume slavery spread by honorable, or peaceful, or any means other than killing and violence.   Lincoln and others alluded to this repeatedly.   

Slavery spread by means "foul and more foul".  There was not a single part of the spread of slavery where it was otherwise.   

So if you don't grasp that slavery ALWAYS spread by foul and more foul means, you can be stupid about the spread of slavery that caused the US Civil War.   

You can allow supposedly educated men teach that the Civil War was a complicated thing involving "state's rights"   and tariffs.  

When Southern leaders boasted, at the time, they were succinct as humans can be -- they were killing to spread slavery.

After they lost -- a different story.


People think slavery spread because the citizens wanted it, and voted for it, after open debates.  That is simply not true.  Slavery was entirely a violent enterprise, from the start of it, to maintaining it, to spreading it. Violence, and promise of more violence, was at the heart of slavery.


"Repeating watered down,  vague and whitewashed bullshit does not make history go away.  It just makes us dumber about it."

At the time -- until they lost -- Southern leaders  were very clear, emphatic, and detailed.   They were in Kanas, they were killing and torturing, and they would spread slavery against- - against -- state's rights.  Not just spread slavery into the territory of Kansas,  but to spread it into states like California and Oregon, already free states.

When Kansas did become a free state, despite the effort by Southern leaders, despite the paid killers, despite Davis Atchison and his over 2000 men,  Southern leaders STILL sent more killers to Kansas, for the same purpose.

In fact, after Kansas became a free state officially, in 1861,  Jefferson Davis and Southern leaders repeated the same exact demand.   Kansas must -- as a war ultimatum- - accept and respect slavery.   Even after five years of war started and pushed by Southern leaders and their paid men,  even after Kansas became a free state- -- remember this -- Southern leaders issued very clear War Ultimatums about Kansas.

Kansas must accept slavery.

This is from Jefferson Davis own book -- Rise and Fall of the Confederacy....he was proud of this declaration.   And it was not his only time making it clear  -- while Davis often just used shorthand "Southern rights in the territories"   he was talking about, and sometimes spelled it out, that Kansas and other places must accept and protect slavery,  even if the public clearly wanted, and voted against, slavery.

You should have been taught this.   Nothing is more basic. 

You can easily see Davis book, and the part of Kansas rejection of slavery was "intolerable"  here...See Jeff Davis own book -- here, check page 46,

Of course, Davis does not bother to explain that he sent the killers to Kansas, that Kansas citizens were overwhelmingly against slavery, and everyone knew it.  What the people in Kansas wanted was immaterial, according to Davis.  Slave owners had every right to have slavery in Kansas -- and in the North as you will see, because of Dred Scott decision and for the "safety" of the white race.

There are college courses that teach Jefferson Davis book, and simply accept Davis's narrative -- in other words, the teacher does  not tell the students that Davis sent killers to Kansas, paid them.  

Nor do the teachers tell the students Kansas citizens were overwhelmingly against slavery, and the only ones fighting to spread slavery there were paid -- paid.

Nor do they tell the students that Atchison passed Kansas Act, on the fraudulent basis of "citizens will be perfectly free"  to decide slavery, but then Atchison personally led killers to stop Kansas citizens from deciding anything -- in fact, he arrested, and later killed, people (or his men did) for speaking or publishing newspapers against slavery.

So we have right now, in college classes, teachers so shallow in their understanding of the facts about Atchison and the history of spread of slavery,  that they will just essentially act as if Jefferson Davis narrative was anything other than lunacey and deception

Spend a few days reading Southern newspapers from that time period -- Southern editors pumped up the hate and fear.   South had "rights" -- to spread slavery for white survival.  The North is taking our rights.    

Blacks, of course, had no rights.  But even when 90% of the people were against slavery (95% in Kansas)  they had no rights either.  That was the "logic"  of Southern killing sprees, War Ultimatums,  and endless boast about spreading slavery West.

That is what Southern leaders bragged about, officially, in writing, repeatedly, clearly, and it is what they did.

It is important to know this -- these were not "a few extremist"  or a few "ruffians". 

 This was not "trouble" in Kansas.  It was paid killers, led by officials of the US (Atchison, Jefferson Davis were part of the US federal government)  sending killers to Kansas and beyond to spread slavery and by law and torture,  kill to stop even speaking and publishing newspapers against slavery.

When Kansas citizens rejected slavery overwhelmingly,  Southern leaders quickly pushed Kansas Act through Congress, then sent US Senator Atchison to Kansas to force slavery into Kansas and beyond, against state's rights.

   After the war,  the distortion of "states rights"  was repeated so often, it's largely accepted meme today.  But nothing, absolutely nothing, could be further from the truth.

   South leaders sent killers to Kansa,  over 1000 of them, and promised to send 5000.  There was no other reason, than to force slavery into Kansas, and stop all speech, all newspapers, all preaching, all voting against slavery.

Kansas Act -- passing it on the lie that people in Kansas would be "perfectly free" to chose slavery or not -- shows exactly the nature of slavery. Violent, deceptive, and unrelenting.  Always a group of men pushing it for their own purposes, never an "organic" or public eager for slavery.  Always a few men, like Atchison, Davis, Douglas, pushing it for their own selfish purposes. 


Actually  just the opposite, when it came to slavery.  

When Kansas citizens overwhelmingly voted against slavery, and tried enter into US as a free state in 1853,  Southern leaders had to quit pretending they were for "state's rights"  or "popular sovereignty". 

     Everyone knew, even those who passed Kansas Act,  that the citizens of Kansas were against slavery by overwhelming majorities ---  Stephen A Douglas repeatedly admitted Kansas citizens were "19 out of 20"  against slavery -- and he was right on the money.   In repeated votes,  Kansas citizens voted 90% or more against slavery.


No other single fact is as important as this -- the man who passed Kansas Act with Stephen A Douglas went immediately to Kansas and started to terrorize, later kill,  to spread slavery there, by force.

Yes, the same man -- David Rice Atchison -- was likely wearing the same clothes he had on to pass Kansas Act, when he went to Kansas to lead hired men to terrorize in Kansas.

When Charles Sumner exposed Atchison -- by name -- for two days on the floor of the Senate for exactly this, Sumner was almost beaten to death.  

The man laughing in the cartoon  at the time, was actually laughing.  He was standing a few feet from Sumner, and had told Sumner the day before he should be "kicked like a dog".

No one ever could explain how the Senate floor was open to people walking in -- the man who attacked Sumner was not a US Senator, and the door to the Senate was locked and a Sergeant of Arms was in charge of who got in.

Did Douglas tell the Sergeant at Arms to let the man in?  It's very likely, actually, but that's another story.  Sumner and Douglas had words before,  Sumner told Douglas to stop using the word "Nigger" in the Senate. 

Douglas had suddenly starting using "Nigger" term and being oddly and extremely hateful to anyone for anything to do with equality of the races, probably to show his allegiance to "Southern causes"  as he needed more Southern support for his quest of Presidency.   That's all conjecture, but it fits all the facts we know. 




Who was it left up to, to decide on slavery or no slavery?

Said Douglas, Atchison, and Davis, it was up  to the Supreme Court.  But that was AFTER they passed Kansas Act. 

As they were passing Kansas Act, they never said such nonsense.  They said it would be up to the people to decide.

After they passed Kansas Act, they brought it the "Oh, it's up to Supreme Court.

In fact, Douglas who gave speech, after speech, after speech in the most proud and loud manner, that the "people would decide"  actually took out language to that effect from the Kansas Act.  Charles Sumner and others  tried to put the language back in -- Douglas again took it out, as he was Chairman of House and Senate Committee on Kansas. He personally decided the words in the Kansas Act.

When Lincoln pointed out Douglas's duplicity and deceit on this matter, Douglas acted as if this was the most vile attack on anyone in the history of the United States.  Of course, Douglas did exactly as Lincoln and others knew he was doing --he did have that language removed, no one else could have.  

The only dispute was his motive to repeatedly remove such language that made it clear that the people could decide.

It was clear, said Lincoln, this was exactly the ruse, the fraud.  Claim the Kansas Act was for popular sovereignty, but then by deceit and slight of hand, do exactly the opposite, using Kansas Act and Dred Scott decision. 

In fact, Lincoln's "House Divided"  Speech was 100% -- every word -- about this contrived conspiracy to spread slavery by mean "foul and more foul"  where they could not spread it at all otherwise. 

South had the Supreme Court standing by, ready for any resistance in Kansas, if the Kansas Act by itself did not work well.  And the Kansas Act needed the help.

David Rice Atchison, his money and paid men, were the help.  

So Atchison not only got Kansas Act passed, he was there in person, he went there to Kansas in person immediately, to terrorize and stop all public speech, and all voting, against slavery.

It almost worked.   It was a good plan --but Atchison underestimated the bravery of Kansas citizens, especially a man named John Brown, who ended up being the first to push back against Atchison's men, and scare the shit out of them, as they had scared the farmers in Kansas. 

Don't believe the shit you might here about John Brown's violence -- he only responded in violence AFTER Atchison's men killed one of his sons, tortured another to madness, promised to kill him and his whole family. 

Without Brown,  the entire history of the US would be much different.

Until Brown fought back in terms Atchison's men understood, Atchison was very much on course to make the slavery spread, again, only this time, to all of the West.

Yet most history books just show Brown as some kind of violent lunatic.  He fought back that way because Southern leaders brought thousand or more men to Kansas, paid them to kill and terrorize, and killed his son, and promised endless more violence.

He did the right thing,



Remember, Davis personally sent Atchison to Kansas, and named him, officially "General of Law and Order"  in Kansas territory.

Remember,  Stephen A Douglas with Atchison pushed Kansas Act through, then (essentially) held Atchison's coat in his position as Chairman of House and Senate on Kansas.  Atchison literally rushed to Kansas and started terrorizing, later killing, citizens of Kansas to push slavery there.

And - Atchison bragged about it.  Southern newspapers were kiddy at the beating of Sumner, and promised more beatings to people in the North.  

No one was more proud of the killings in Kansas than Atchison himself.  

This was "the most joyous" day of his life, he told his men, the invasion of Lawrence. 

David Rice Atchison ….from

….completely surrounded by my younger brothers, (terrible enthusiasm.) each supporting a U.S. rifle, and on the manly countenance of each, plainly seen, his high & fixed determination to carry our to the letter the lofty & glorious resolves that have brought him here    - the resolves of the entire South, and of the present Administration, that is, to carry the war into the heart of the country, (cheers.)

Never to slacken or stop until every spark of free-state, free-speech, free-niggers, or free in any shape is quenched out of Kansaz! (Long shouting & cheering.) And what is also pleasing beyond my powers of description, is the fact that, having above me, - as I speak the honest sentiments of my heart and the sentiments of the administration & the blessed pro-slavery party throughout this great nation,

 - is the only flag we recognize,  the only one under whose folds we will march into Lawrence, the only one under which these d--d Abolishionist prisoners were arrested - who are now outside yonder tent endeavoring to hear me, which I care not a d--n if they do! (Cheers.) Yes, these G--d d--d sons of d--d puritan stock will learn their fate, and they may go home and tell their cowardly friends what I say! - I care not for them! - I defy & d--n them all to H--l. (roars & yells.) Yes, that large red flag denotes our purpose to press the matter even to blood, - the large lone white star in the centre denotes the purity of our purpose, & the words "Southern Rights" above it clearly indicate the righteousness of our principles.
I say under all these circumstances I am now enjoying the proudest moments of my life, - but I will detain you no longer. (Cries of go on, go on.) No boys! - I connot stay your spirit of patriotism, I cannot even stay my own; - our precious time is wasting. - No hasten to work, - follow your worthy and immediate leader, Col. Stringfellow! (Yells.) he will lead you on to a glorious victory, & I will be there to support all your acts & assist as best I may in all your acts, & assist completing the overthrow of that hellish party, & in crushing out the last sign of d--d abolitionism in the territory of Kansas. - (Three times Yells for Atchison.)


  The third invasion of Lawrence, during the Civil War, was outright butchery of women and children by Southern men, who picked Lawrence for complete and violent vengeance, because they resisted Atchison in the first place.


Stephen Douglas, who was Atchison's business partner, and partner in passing Kansas Act,  was Chairman of House and Senate Committee on Kansas,  went right along with sending his partner to Kansas in capacity as "General of Law and Order".

The conspiracy to spread slavery into Kansas was by a small group of men -- not by public outcry anywhere.   Most whites in Kansas were already against slavery overwhelmingly.

The only "actors" -- those who do things -- to be pushing slavery into Kansas were Atchison, and his paid men,  authorized and paid by Jeff Davis.   Remember that -- 

Lilncoln and others referred to this basic fact -- a few men in control (Atchison and Davis)  were behind this, not public sentiment anywhere.   Yet because they were violent and eager to do whatever it took, these few men, hiring 800, and later over 1000 men, five years before the Civil War, had a profound impact on events in Kansas, and directly led to the Civil War. 

Atchison was not ashamed, nor did he mumble.  He boasted of getting the 800 men to Kansas.  He boasted to them, and about them. 

Atchison's logic was that Kansas folks were not allowed to be against slavery because Missouri had slavery (pushed there in much the same way, by the way)  and he would "see Kansas in hell before I see them as a free state".

The "nigger stealers"  would disrupt slavery in Missouri.  And he would get 5000 killers, instead of just 1000, if that's what it took, to force slavery into Kansas. 

The first thing Atchison tried to do -- other than stop the votes against slavery -- was to stop the right of Kansas citizens to even speak (yes, to speak) openly against slavery.  So, per Atchison, Kansas citizens could not vote, nor even speak publicly, against slavery.  Why?   Because he had made, with his "legislature" public speaking against slavery a crime -- much like it was already in most of the slave states.  

Why the hell did we let this happen?


David Atchison, US Senator
led the first invasion of Lawrence.

Boasted of killing to stop Kansas citizens from speaking against slavery. 

Who is David Rice Atchison?

Atchison and Stephen A Douglas passed the Kansas Act in 1854.  Early in 1854, as soon as Atchison could get to Kansas, he personally led the first invasion into Kansas with hundreds of men from Missouri, to terrorize and stop people in Kansas from voting against slavery.

It almost worked.

But the men in Kansas fought back much more than Atchison predicted. In fact, Atchison personally put ads in Texas and South Carolina newspapers for men to come to Kansas and kill  "the time for talk is over"  he said. 

It took two years but Atchison, with Stephen Douglas help, and money from Jefferson Davis, hired enough men to invade Lawrence Kansas.    In 1856, Atchison boasted of killing to spread slavery in Kansas, even though over 90% of Kansas citizens were against slavery.

He also boasted he was killing to stop folks from even speaking against slavery -- he had passed a law to that effect.  His invasion of Lawrence, with those hired men, was to enforce  his own law against publishing anti-newspaper laws.  And he was proud of it. 

Atchison was -- officially -- the "General of Law and Order" in Kansas Territory, named to that post by Jefferson Davis, and with approval of Stephen A Douglas.    Remember, Atchison and Douglas got the Kansas Act passed.

Douglas helped behind the scenes, at first.  When the public outcry in Illinois about the killings in Kansas got so bad, to save his own political life, Douglas flipped on Atchison. 



The most important fact about Atchison was that, as soon as he got Kansas Act passed, he went to Kansas and started terrorizing.  Later, when terrorizing itself did not work, he moved up to killing,  his men did the killing.

Your history teacher will know about the "Crimes Against Kansas" speech, a speech Charles Sumner gave, and was beaten almost to death for doing so, on the Senate floor.

But your teacher probably has no clue that the entire speech was about David Rice Atchison, and what he did --how he got Kansas Act passed, then went to Kansas.   The speech was two days long, hour after hour, detail after detail, of what Atchison's men were doing.

And it was going to get much worse -- Sumner's speech did not shame Atchison, Atchison was proud of it.  And Atchison moved the violence from the level Sumner was speaking of, to an organized effort by 800 to 1000 men Atchison had hired.

If you read the "Crimes against Kansas"  speech,  and you probably should, realize that.   What Sumner spoke of was just up to May of 1856.  That same week Atchison's men arrived, and Atchison led them on another invasion. 

So as soon as Atchison got Kansas Act passed, he rushed to Kansas, there terrorized, later killed, to not only force slavery into Kansas but to prevent all public opposition to slavery. Specifically he made it illegal to publish anti-slavery newspapers in Kansas. Then after Sumner's speech, Atchison's killings grew even worse.

Here is a picture of the survivors of Atchison's first invasion of Lawrence Kansas to enforce his "law" against publishing an anti-slavery newspaper.  Later, men loyal to Atchison murdered every woman and child in Lawrence during the Civil War. Lawrence was invaded three times, the last time it was burned to the ground, and civilians massacred.   This picture is of the survivors of the first invasion.  They moved out of Lawrence, so they survived the later massacre.  The picture is from 1895.

Senator Atchison Boasts

Remember this -- 90% of citizens in Kansas were against slavery,  when Atchison paid killers to invade and force slavery into Kansas and beyond.


Jefferson Davis officially named Atchison "General of Law and Order"  in Kansas in 1856.  Davis was then Secretary of War

Very soon after this,  Atchison boasted about the "rebel" flag.   He boasted that he hated the flag of the United States, and would from then on only honor the rebel flag.   The rebel flag was red in color "for the blood"  they would spill to spread slavery. 

Davis, when asked if what Atchison did was legal, replied that everything Atchison did was "Constitutionally required".  

Remember too -- the first time anyone mentioned the rebel flag, the General boasted it was red for the color of blood, blood they would spill to SPREAD slavery. 



Clearly Atchison's plan was to pass the Kansas Act,  claiming the people of Kansas would be "perfectly free"  to choose or reject slavery.... then invade Kansas, and terrorize the unarmed citizens into accepting slavery. 

We know Atchison left "immediately"  after passing the Kansas Act, because Charles Sumner, the Senator almost beaten to death, on the Senate floor, was talking about Atchison and his killing sprees, and how Atchison passed Kansas Act, then left "immediately" .

Does that mean in 1 day, or two weeks?  We don't know. But Atchison did not stay in DC after the Kansas Act passed, he showed up in Missouri and then invaded Kansas,  Lawrence Kansas, which then had the newspaper against slavery.    Atchison, or others doing Atchison's bidding would invade Lawrence three separate times, the 3rd time during the official Civil War,  where they just massacred almost everyone that remained, even women and children.

Don't forget these basic things -- your history teacher doesn't know them,  and doesn't want to look stupid by admitting he did not know.  How could  he know?   While this was common knowledge then, stupidly teachers pass off Kansas as a "Trouble"  a "prelude" -- and that "there was plenty of blame to go around.

Plenty of blame to go around my ass!   The citizens of Kansas were just living their lives, and they were against slavery.   But Atchison had promised to "see KANSAS IN HELL"  before he let them (the citizens)  make Kansas a free state -- even though 90% of the white men there, then and later, were against slavery.

Never, not one day, not one week, at no time whatsoever, were the white citizens of Kansas remotely okay or pro slavery.  Some "history teachers"   are so stupid, they just ASSUME many whites in Kansas were for slavery. Not even close, and those pushing slavery into Kansas never even pretended that most citizens of Kansas were against slavery.  No one bothered to claim such an absurdity.

  Kansas would then become a slave state,  even though 90% or more of the citizens were very much against slavery.



  Atchison had boasted that Kansas men were cowards, and would not put up a fight.  Jefferson Davis said much the same thing at the start of the Civil War,  that he would "wipe up all the blood with a handkerchief"  that spilled below the Mason Dixon line. 

Both men were wrong.   

The show of force, with Atchison's hired killers, did work at first, because the whites ran.  They were not soldiers, they were not even armed for battle. 

But over all, Atchison's violence backfired.  The first men he got were from Missouri-- just across the river.   They were not paid killers like Atchison would hire later, they were unemployed tuff guys.  The first attack was a bully tactic, to terrorize.

 If Atchison had another 1000 men in the first invasion, or if he could have kept paying them after 1858, maybe the plan would work,




 But if one man, John Brown had not fought back and scared the shit out of many of the hired killers, (remember, the hired men were told Kansas folks would not fight back),  Atchison probably succeeds.     Slavery had always spread like this -- by the way --not just in this effort.  Slavery had never spread in any other way than by violence. 

As Lincoln noted, slavery started in violence, was always maintained by violence, and could only spread by violence.

Pottawatomie massacre

But Brown's bullies had tortured one of Brown's sons, who went insane from the torture (they probably castrated him). Atchison's men killed another, and then promised to kill him.   Notice the dates of Brown's supposed "insane"  attack at Pottwatomie.   You never ever hear this part of it.  

Atchison had been promising wide spread death already, and already tortured Browns son, as mentioned already killed another, and had killed dozens of others.

Then Atchison's hired men showed up, the ones he needed because it would take 800 to 1000 for the next level of killing Atchison promised.   Atchison's second attack on Lawrence, and his speech boasting to the newly arrived killers, came two days BEFORE Brown's revenge. 

Brown was directly responding not only to the torture of his son, and killing another son,  and promising to kill him and the rest of his family, Brown responded because of the 2nd invasion of Lawrence. 

In every high school in this country, as far as we know, Brown is shown to be a lunatic.   Well, have someone castrate your son, drive him insane. Kill another son. Promise to kill you and your wife.

They really need to give the full picture of Brown, not bury it, if they mention it at all, in a sentence or two.   Even books that connect Brown attack at Pottawatomie to Atchison's killing sprees, don't make the connection candidly.  They act as if Brown was just crazy.

Brown's killing was in revenge -- and it scared the shit out of many of Atchison's men.  They were the killers, the tough guys, the bullies. Atchison told them the Kansas men would run.

Here they were fighting back, and others joined.  If your teacher doesn't know that, they can't teach it. And they don't know it,  because it's not in their books.  Or yours. 



When the first  "bluff" of the first invasion did not work, Atchison hired over 800 men,  mostly from South Carolina and Texas,  to invade Kansas and kill anyone who resisted.  There were three separate invasions of Lawrence Kansas. 

Atchison boasted he and  his men were at war - against the United States,  "For the entire South".   Their goal?    To spread slavery to all of the West, including into states that were already free states.
Just to be clear, Atchison made it clear, his goal, his job, his purpose, was to spread slavery to the Pacific Ocean, even into states (yes states) that were already in the Union as free states.


There are not 10 history teachers in US that teach this most basic part of US history in schools, that we know of.  How could they teach it?  They would have to ignore the text book.   


South issued War Ultimatums.  We do not teach them!!!

Atchison issued War Ultimatums that were actually declarations of war already in progress.  But the South generally -- "back East"  also issued War Ultimatums, about Kansas(!) later, too. So to spread slavery into Kansas, by force, was not something just Atchison was doing with paid men from Davis.

The South as represented by Virginia newspapers were also violent and in support of war to spread slavery into KANSAS.    But here, by the time Virginia papers ran this War Ultimatums, Kansas was ALREADY A FREE STATE.

Remember this - Kansas was ALREADY  A FREE state, by the time these headlines appeared.   Don't forget t his.  Even after Kansas was a free state, Southern leaders issued War Ultimatums than Kansas be a slave state.

Don't let your teacher pass of his or her stupidity about Kansas, as "well there was plenty of blame to go around there".   Atchison brought his killers to Kansas, that was the trouble.  And yes after a time Kansas whites fought back.   The above is more than your history teacher knows. 

Davis himself -- remember this -- Jeff Davis himself issued very clear and proud declarations that he would spread slavery INTO THE NORTH by "force of arms" in 1863.

So in 1856, Southern leaders issued War Ultimatums, even though they were already killing in Kansas.   Then in 1861, after Kansas was a free state, once again, War Ultimatums by Southern leaders.

If that is  not enough,   then in 1863,  during the Civil War, Davis makes it clear, what he thought should already be clear, and was to anyone paying attention.  South leaders wanted slavery in the West and in the North. Blacks must be enslaved,  because of the will of GOD, and for the safety of the white race.  That is what Jeff Davis actually wrote!

Why not teach this? They bragged about it. What the hell is wrong with teaching what they not only bragged about, but what they DID?

Read it. 

This was not some guy saying Davis did that, it was Jeff Davis own damn declaration. 


Southern leaders did a lot of bragging, until they lost.  

By the way, Atchison got the money from Jefferson Davis.  Read his speech. Here is the link again




How would you know -- unless someone told you, or you learned about Atchison's killing sprees, speeches,  and actions in some other way?

You only know what you were told.  And you are not told about Atchison and Southern leaders boasting out the ass about killing to spread slavery against state's rights, and for God.  He did  not admit it.

He bragged about it.  As loudly, as proudly, as he could.   So did other Southern leaders, each in their own extreme way, including Jefferson Davis, and Alexander  Stephens.



Southern leaders not only killed to spread slavery --- they bragged about it.  Loudly, clearly, repeatedly.  


One of many eye witnesses to Atchison's second killing spree in Kansas.

There were not dozens of eye witnesses to the killings and tortures by Atchison's men - -there were hundreds of witnesses.

Remember, Atchison was the US Senator who passed Kansas Act, then immediately goes to Kansas, to terrorize, and later kill, to spread slavery.

And he boasted about it. He did not admit it, Atchison boasted about it.



Eric Foner, Bruce Catton, James McPherson... three major historians about the Civil War in my life time,  are strangely stupid or inept in showing a most basic thing.

The man who passed Kansas Act immediately went to Kansas, and there started terrorizing, later killing,  to spread slavery into Kansas and all of the West. 

In fact Atchison issued War Ultimatums-- promise of endless war, and delivered on that promise.   Slavery must spread all the way to the Pacific.   He didn't just talk about that, he tried to kill enough people in Kansas, and terrorize anyone who got in the South's way, to bring that to pass. 

None of the three mentioned above  - in fact, almost no major historian except Michael Burlingham  - ever related this most basic fact in a candid way,  as the most basic event leading up to the Civil War.

Clearly the Kansas was exactly as Lincoln said -- a violent fraud concocted by slave power to push slavery into all of the West -- and even the North, considering Jeff Davis official declaration of 1863.



I just have not met them yet.

I am sure SOME PhD in US  history knows that Charles Sumner was beaten on the Senate floor, after a speech were he exposed, for two days, details of David Atchison passing the Kansas Act, then rushing to Kansas to kill and terrorize.

In fact, I have read several PHds mention it, but almost in passing, and never in context of how the Kansas Act passed. The point is, the man who passed the Kansas Act rushed to Kansas after he passed it, and started terrorizing, (including castration) and later killing to spread slavery.

Furthermore, Atchison was just getting started on his killings and torture --almost the same day Sumner is beaten for speaking about Atchison and his men, Atchison is boasting of doing the things Sumner accused him of.

This is basic stuff.   But the bullshit way we teach the US Civil War, this most basic fact is whitewashed.

It was not white washed then. 

 As Stephen A Douglas (Atchison's partner) stood by laughing,  Charles Sumner was beaten on the Senate floor, almost to death, for speaking at length about David Rice Atchison, and his paid killers, in Kansas. 

Sumner thought it was important enough to explain on the Senate floor what was common knowledge already- - that the men who passed Kansas Act were committing a violent murderous fraud.  Immediately after passing Kansas Act, the author of that Act rushed to Kansas, and starts killing and terrorizing to spread slavery there.

Nothing is more important that this -- that Atchison (and Douglas) pushed Kansas Act through, telling the country they did so to give the people of Kansas "the perfect right"  to decide slavery themselves. 


In their own documents. In their own speeches. In their own War Ultimatums. In their own books.  

Until they lost, Southern leaders did not mumble. They were not coy.  They were not vague.  Especially those involved in the killings and tortures -- they were proud of it.  

The only way to make  Kansas whites accept slavery was violence -- and it almost worked.  It had worked in the past. 




One of the absurdities of Southern apologist is that they claim today -- with a straight face -that South was for state's rights. 

Atchison and Jeff Davis made it very clear, Kansas had no right to keep slavery out, even after Kansas rejected slavery by 90 and 95%, and even after Kansas became a free state.


See Southern War Ultimatums as boasted of in Richmond papers, May 9, 1861.  Kansas was already a free state, officially, by then.  Yet specifically Southern leaders demanded Kansas "accept and protect slavery".




"Civil War Has Commenced in KANSAS"

Southern leaders were clear, specific, and correct.

They were already  killing to spread slavery -- into Kansas and the entire west -- and boasting of that, from 1856 on.

 -- Per Richmond papers, 1861

1) Slavery is ordained by GOD.  We obey God.

2)  We must spread slavery -- or the white race will be exterminated... E X T E R M I N A T E D.

 We must spread slavery -- or our daughters will "sleep with Niggers":

We must spread slavery -- to just stop the spread of slavery will "burn us to death slowly over an open fire"


Toombs -- to cheering crowds -- made it clear, we will be exterminated, our race destroyed, if we do not spread slavery into Kansas and all of the West.


The North "will make us sting ourselves to death" 

The "exclusion" of slavery into Kansas and beyond was "intolerable"   to Southern honor, white survival, and a "deep religious error".

It did not matter one iota that 95% of the citizens of Kansas were against slavery.  Kansas had no right to keep slavery out. Not the people -- they had not the right. Not the legislature in Kansas- -they had not the right.

Not the Congress of USA --they had not the right.


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



It was not a few nuts, a few "fire eaters" that boasted of killing to spread slavery.  Try Jeff Davis himself -- yes, him  - as you will see.  Try David Atchison, the guy who passed the Kansas Act.  

Deprive the South of "equality" in Kansas said Davis.

And many "history teachers"  are (really) so stupid that they will read Davis book and think "see, the South wanted equal rights!  

 You can't get more Orwellian if you tried.   95% of the whites in Kansas had repeatedly rejected slavery. But the SOUTH  had rights to spread slavery there, anyway.  Spread it by force -- remember that. 

Everyone, including Davis, knew Kansas citizens were overwhelmingly against slavery.  But Davis knew if he wrote "Yes, 95% of Kansas whites were against slavery, and fought against slavery.   That does not matter.  They must accept slavery anyway"   that even stupid history teachers would figure that out.

So Davis did not write it honestly. He wrote "they deprived the South of equality".    

If you think history teachers are not that stupid, you are wrong. Many are.  They only know what is told to them, and no one pointed out the bullshit lies and absurdities of most things Davis said. 

Maybe if someone had TOLD your history teacher, like he or she was a child, and explained it very clearly, yes, they would know.  But no one did, sadly. 





Atchison was Douglas's partner in the Senate, and in business.

A few weeks before Atchison induced Douglas to lead the fight to  pass Kansas Act, Douglas boasted that no one would ever be so vile to end "the sacred compact" - the Compromise of 1850.   Days later, however, Douglas was trashing the very "Compromise" he claimed was "sacred". 

Kansas Act, if you did not know, was supposedly to allow those in Kansas the "perfect right"  to decide slavery themselves.  Douglas said that "Nineteen out of 20"  people in Kansas did not want slavery -- it was that well known.  Kansas citizens had already tried to enter the US as a free state because so many were against slavery there.

Yet Douglas and Atchison were interested in their "rights"  to vote on it. 

Immediately after passing Kansas Act,  the ruse was exposed -- Atchison went to Kansas, and immediately took over 500 men from Missouri (he paid the men) to terrorize, and later kill, to spread slavery in Kansas.    

The third invasion of Lawrence.
Over 100 women and children were killed
in the third invasion.  
The entire town was burned to the ground.



Just given how extremely well known Atchison was at the time -- for invading Kansas and there killing and terrorizing -- makes it all the more surprising people are stupid enough to think Atchison is famous for being president for one day.

Not only was he not President for a day, and not only was he the guy who got Kansas Act passed, and not only was he the guy that then rushed to Kansas to terrorize, latter kill to spread slavery, and not only did he brag about that repeatedly,  even mildly competention high school history teachers likely teach the "Crimes against Kansas  Speech.

Guess who the Crimes Against Kansas Speech was about?

It was about David Rice Atchison and his men, how he passed Kansas Act then rushed to Kansas then started terrorizing, later killing to spread slavery, and bragging about it.

Sound familiar?

Take a look at the drawing of that day -- Sumner being beaten almost to death on the Senate floor.

Do you see the man in back ground laughing?  Guess who that is?

That's Stephen A Douglas, who sat by and laughed as Sumner was beaten.  Douglas had told Sumner he should be kicked to death the day before.   It's very likely Douglas had something to do with letting in the Senate chamber the man who did the beating.  There is no doubt Douglas sat by laughing.

Read the Crimes Against Kansas Speech.  It is 100% about the killings and tortures done by Atchison and his name.

So it's hard to believe how little attention he gets now.  Absurdly, there are courses taught in college on the Crimes Against Kansas speech.  The course outline of the course I saw did not even mention Atchison -- but the speech was about him and his men.

And the course outline did not mention Stephen A Douglas sat by and laughed.  Nor did it mention Douglas passed Kansas Act because of pressure from Atchison.

See -- you really need all the facts if you are going to teach history, otherwise your students are dumber for your effort.




Atchison was not the only one to boast in Kansas of killing to spread slavery,.   Dozens of other folks -- working with Atchison, getting paid by him and Jefferson Davis (yes, they were paid by Jefferson Davis, according to Atchison himself) 

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



 QUESTION  Ninety percent of Kansas citizens were against slavery, maybe 95%.   So how on on earth, at first, did Atchison have such an easy time of pushing slavery into Kansas?  
 ANSWER  Because at first the white males of Kansas, almost all farmers, were not even armed.  

 More importantly, Jeff Davis was Secretary of War -- he had sent Atchison to Kansas.  Stephen A Douglas was Chairman of the Committee on Kansas Territory.  They both backed Atchison, and both convinced the President that the Kansas Citizens were ruthless and violent, and should be arrested. 

 It was a very good plan -- pretend to open up slavery for a vote, then kill to stop voters.  With Jeff Davis controlling goofy President Pierce, and Stephen A Douglas partners with Atchison, the people of Kansas were labelled the outlaws..  And they had no one to lead them in fighting back.

Atchison - Douglas -Davis combination was going to win, going to force slavery down the throats of Kansas and beyond, never mind that 90% of white citizens there were against it.

Then John Brown fought back and scared the shit out of the hired killers.

Atchison -Davis-  Douglas efforts to force slavery into Kansas failed because 95% of the people there were against slavery.  If only 70 or 80% were against slavery, that would not be enough.

Atchison could not sustain enough violence long enough, could not pay the killers for years.  Jeff Davis was out as Secretary of War in 1858, and Stephen Douglas was out as Chairman of the very powerful committee on Kansas Territory.

Pierce was no longer President. 

And one more "detail".  A man name John Brown showed up,  and showed how to fight back against Atchison's men.

 That's another story. 


Once  Atchison got to Kansas, he threw away pretense of letting the people vote in any honest way. Quite the opposite, he boasted -- boasted -- let me repeat that -- boasted he was killing to spread slavery there.

He would not just spread slavery into Kansas Territory -- he would spread it to all of the West.

Survivors of Senator Atchison's first invasion of Lawrence.

Atchison invaded Kansas to arrest those who published anti slavery newspaper.  


Atchison made his hired men promise to kill that day.

 Jefferson Davis paid the men, per Atchison's own boasting. 

Atchison was sent to Kansas by Jeff Davis. Jeff Davis explained later why killing was justified in Kansas, even if 90% of the citizens there were against slavery. 


What was common knowledge at the time -- what Southern leaders themselves bragged about,  is oddly missing from US text books. 

Southern leaders actually boasted of killing to spread slavery.   They did not mumble.  They did not whisper.  They boasted of it. 

Loudly and proudly..... until they lost.



When people see the speeches, books, documents and boasting by Southern leaders, (boasting of starting the war, boasting of killing, boasting of their goal to spread slavery AGAINST states rights)  a typical reaction is this 

  "Oh you have extremist in every group".

Well true.  But in this case the extremist were in charge and doing -- or hiring others to do -- the killings.
After they lost, understandably, those who boasting (like Jeff Davis, see below) of killing to spread slavery would never boast of such things again.  

Davis was very specific  until the South lost.  They were at war to SPREAD slavery into places that did not want slavery, and were already free states.

Davis address to the people of the free states seems to shock people now -- it shocked no one at the time.  He not only promised in this address to invade the North and enslave blacks there -- he ordered Lee to do so, which Lee did.   Yes, Lee, exactly as Jeff Davis promised in the address in January, did as invade the North, did capture free blacks and did turn them into slavers.. or as Jeff Davis put it in his clever way "put them back on the slave status forever".

Killing to spread slavery was not news to anyone alive, North or South, by 1860.   The justification for killing to spread slavery was well known -  it was GOD's will.  

And because of Dred Scott decision -- per Jeff Davis himself - the United States Supreme Court had ordered -- yes ordered -- that slaves were not human beings but property, and that the federal government must PROTECT slavery.

Image result

Southern own War Ultimatums were exactly in line -- Kansas, though by then a free state accepted as such by Congress and President Buchanan officially, MUST accept and protect slavery.

Never mind that 90% of the citizens in Kansas had rejected slavery.

Never mind that Kansas was officially a free state.

Kansas MUST accept and respect slavery.   That was not a suggestion.

That was not a preference. 

Davis specifically wrote about it -- the resistance to slavery in Kansas was the "intolerable grievance."   Remember this -- he wrote this and sent killers into Kansas knowing full well Kansas citizens became a free state, and Kansas rejected slavery by repeated votes of 90% and 95%.

Southern leaders completely and violently  rejected states rights to keep slavery out when Kansas rejected slavery.

 State's rights was a term they had used occasionally  to excuse slavery  ---  but when state's started to reject slavery, Southern leaders immediately rejected state's rights regarding slavery.  And Jeff Davis explained the "logic" of rejected states rights in his own book.  We show you the exact page where he explained it. 


Already killing (officially) 1856 on.

 Unofficial killing and terror had been going on for decades. 

The South (those in control of it, "slave power" if you will)  was already waging, already bragging about, already killing for decades leading up to 1856.

1856 was a "big deal"  because that is when US Senator Atchison officially took over, named by Jefferson Davis then Secretary of War, as "General of Law and Order". But Atchison had been in Kansas for two years already.  He went to Kansas immediately after passing the Kansas Act in 1854



As Stephen A Douglas said repeatedly, no one believes Kansas citizens wanted slavery.  Specifically he estimated 95% of citizens in Kansas would reject slavery (and he was right).    But he and the co sponsor of Kansas Act (Atchison) claimed they simply wanted the official right of the people there to decide.

Which of course turned out to be the violent fraud critics claim.  Atchison immediately went to Kansas and started terrorizing -- later killing to spread slavery and silence any public speech or newspapers against slavery.

Kansas repeatedly voted against slavery. No one even pretended the citizens of Kansas wanted slavery.   US Senator Atchison and Stephen Douglas passed the Kansas Act under the fraud of letting the people of Kansas "perfectly free"  to decide slavery themselves.

When Kansas citizens DID decide slavery - they rejected it overwhelmingly.  Atchison, the Senator who passed Kansas Act, immediately left for Kansas, and when soon there, started terrorizing, and later killing, to spread slavery.

 In fact, the war to spread slavery was going on for decades -- just now, with Dred Scott decision, Southern leaders did not have to rely on sermons about GOD's will.  Now they had the official right, according to Jeff Davis himself.  That was Jeff Davis justification -- remember that -- in his own book.  Not someone else, that was Jeff Davis own justification in his own book.

Justification for what? 

For the War Ultimatums. For invading the North as he boasted of.  For Atchison's killing sprees in Kansas.   And for much more. 




Slavery was always started, spread, and maintained by violence -- violence against the slaves, but also by torture and killing of whites who got in the way. You could be tortured just for owning the wrong book in the South and in Kansas, for example. 

Lincoln explained this -- but hundreds of others did too. You could hardly be alive in the continental United States after 1800 and not know the ISIS like violence used to spread slavery over and over and over.  Sadly, this is not taught in our schools, at least not in candid terms.

For example no US text book that we have found in five years have even mentioned Southern War Ultimatums, much less shown them.  Yet Southern leaders were proud of them.  The Southern War Ultimatums were well know.  Jefferson Davis himself boasted of using violence to spread slavery NORTH.  Why not teach what these men boasted of, and did?

"The South was already at war, already killing, and already bragging about killing to spread slavery, long before Lincoln even ran for Senate. "

Most people -- even "history teachers"   tell you the Civil War started after Lincoln was elected.    Not even close.

Southern leaders themselves -- remember this - Southern leaders themselves boasted they were at war (yes they used the word "war" ) and bragged they would keep killing until slavery was spread to all of Kansas and the West -- including into California and Oregon, already free states.

Not some nuts in a bar.

Not some idle boast. 

Atchison boasted of it -- and did it. 

And it almost worked.


David Rice Atchison was  more important, and better known, than Lincoln until Lincoln ran for Senate.  

In fact, Atchison was the most powerful man in the Senate --and left the Senate to go to Kansas.  There, in Kansas, Atchison hired 1000, and over time over 2000 men, with money supplied by Jefferson Davis.  

Atchison's money ran out, and so did most of the men, who were only there for the money.  

It takes a lot of money to pay 2000 men.  Davis simply took it out of the US Treasury, at first.  But after 1858, Davis was no longer Secretary of War.  He and Douglas could no longer arrange the money to pay Atchison's killers.

That's why the killings in Kansas reduced to a trickly after 1858, until the start of the Civil War.  Douglas and Davis were not able to fund the killers.  And --Kansas men had organized and fought back, making even paid killers think twice about atta

 Reunion for survivors for one of Atchison's raids,  1895


Note: I put links to original sources in this post.

Atchison promised to spread slavery all the way to the Pacific, including into states and territories that were already free states, or already territories that were clearly against slavery.

Idiotically today we often see Kansas Act as something to do with Stephen A Douglas effort to get "popular sovereignty"  into Kansas, and let the people there decide.   What a crock of crap.

Given what Atchison did- - with Douglas help -- it takes a special kind of stupid to say or write such a thing.  Yet it's often taught that way.





"Here alone I am molested, I have no security, or tranquility..... my countrymen, do you hear me or not (the crowd cheers)

We will be exterminated if we can not spread slavery

Lincoln would destroy the white race. Slave owners were "molested"  in the North -- people could speak against slavery. People could show disapproval -- speak in Congress or Senate against slavery (for 12 years it was against Senate rules to speak against slavery, that ended in 1854)

When you hear them speak about being "molested" they mean they heard negative comments in the North against slavery.

In the South, it was against the LAW to speak publically against slavery.   And of course, slaves were terrorized and tortured.  But the slave owners claimed to be victims of "molestation"

The North tries to force us to sting ourselves to death -(not not spreading slavery)

There was but ONE issue -- ONE only, Lincoln said.

The spread of slavery.  He would not allow the illegal spread of slavery.  He said this hundreds of times in speeches.  Maybe thousands of times.  Here, he wrote it. 

 "You think slavery ought to be extended - I do not."

Remember this -- Southern leaders made this very very clear, even more often than Lincoln made it clear.

We have every right to expand slavery -- and our lives depend on it.




Most people do not even notice what should be obvious to all -- again and again and again -- Lincoln made it clear,  "we will be all one thing or all another".  All slave states or no slave states.

The House Divided Speech, one of the most famous speeches in US history, is 100%  about this. Not 99% .  Read it, not just the title, read the full speech.

This was not his only speech about this -- he had said the same thing hundreds, if not thousands of times.   The machinery of spreading slavery, he called it, had put the United States on a course of being destroyed by -- or destroying, slavery.

One would survive. One would go on.  Slavery would take over, like a cancer (he called it a cancer) or slavery would end.  Why?  He explained this dozens of times.

Because of Kansas Act (passed by Atchison) and the "second measure"  Dred Scott decision (passed by those trying to help Atchison by then in Kansas, killing and terrorizing there).

This was Lincoln's BASIC message. And when you know what Atchison did -- passed Kansas Act -- and what he was doing -- killing and terrorizing to spread slavery into Kansas and beyond - you will realize just how right Lincoln ws. 

If they could spread slavery into Kansas, whose white male citizens were 95% against slavery,  based on Kansas Act and Dred Scott, there was no way to stop them from spreading it -- as they said they would -- all over. 

This will sound bizarre to you today, Stupidly we are taught the South cared about state's rights and just wanted to keep slavery.  Utter hogwash.  They were killing to spread slavery -- and they were bragging about it. Not admitting, they were bragging about it.

Read Atchison's speech.   It's not the only document proving his killings and boasting about it-- but it is the most clear.  

He speaks of who pays him.

He makes it clear they are there to kill.

He makes it clear he works "for the entire South".

He makes it clear of the goal -- to spread slavery and silence anyone who publishes newspapers against it.

 Here is the link.   Go there and read his speech, it's stunning.  It should be in every US history text book.  


I can't help it no one told us this -- not my fault.

We should have been told all about this, from grade school on up, and told in a clear, no bullshit way.

We were never told about this, not in a candid way.  I've run into "Civil War experts"  who had no idea of this information, others who knew it only in vastly white washed terms.

What Southern War ultimatums?  What do you mean, a US Senator goes to Kansas and there kills to spread slavery against state's rights?

What do you mean Jeff Davis boasted citizens had no right to reject slavery -- not by vote, not by legislation, not by any means.    

We were told just the opposite, that Southern leaders cared about state's rights.

The hell they did. 

Question:  How the hell does something so basic get whitewashed? 

Answer:  Because text book publishers never were allowed, or even cared to, pissoff Southern school boards.  Southern school boards have for over 100 years made sure national text books whitewashed the insanely violent and cruel boasting of Southern leaders, and their ISIS like actions leading up to the Civil War. 


This was common knowledge then -- newspapers North, South, everyplace, focused on this for years.  Not months, YEARS.  Lincoln got back into politics because of it.  The GOP began because of it.

There is simply no way to overstate the importance of Southern leaders killings, invasions and tortures to spread slavery.  It is a vile, and violent story.   Our text books have never laid this out candidly.

Southern leaders were boasting of these things.  They did not just admit them, they boasted of them, in their own books, their own documents, their own speeches, and their own newspapers -- until they lost.

After they lost,  Southern leaders came up with a fundamentally deceptive set of excuses. Stupidly, we have taught essentially Southern leaders deceptive excuses. 

The most common stupidity that is taught as gospel -- that South fought, at worst, to keep slavery. Oh hell no. Not even close.   

They fought, and bragged of it, issued War Ultimatums about it repeatedly, and made it extremely clear -- over and over clear, emphatically clear.  They were fighting to SPREAD slavery. Not keep, SPREAD slavery.

Southern leaders were not only killing, torturing, and boasting of it, they were promising endless violence to spread slavery-- against states rights.

They hated states rights when Kansas rejected slavery.  They gathered, advertised for,  and sent over 2000 men -- paid them -- to kill  and terrorize to stop states rights.  To force slavery into Kansas and beyond. 

And it almost worked. 

When Lincoln spoke about "we will be all one thing, or we will be the other"   this is exactly what he was talking about. 



Atchison was not "some guy."  He personally got Stephen A Douglas to pass Kansas Act -- and he boasted of that, too. So did his newspapers.  

Furthermore, according to Jefferson Davis himself, Atchison, Jeff Davis, and Stephen A. Douglas personally took the Kansas Act to the President (Pierce) to sign.   Those three men convinced the President that Kanas Act would make Kansas citizens "perfectly free" to decide slavery themselves.

One tiny little problem -- Atchison immediately left for Kansas, and there started terrorizing, later killing, to spread slavery.   Clearly he had no intention of letting Kansas citizens decide anything for themselves, if he and his paid men could stop it.

And they almost did .


Famous 1850s.

The most famous man in the United States  during the early and mid 1850's for a time was arguably  David Rice Atchison.  Certainly he was more famous than Lincoln then.

In fact, Atchison's actions in Kansas --and in passing Kansas Act -- is what got Lincoln back into politics in 1854.

Your "history" teacher probably doesn't know this either -- but  Charles Sumner was beaten on the Senate floor -- almost to death -- after talking about David Rice Atchison, his men, and  their killing sprees in Kansas.  

 The entire speech, called "Crimes Against Kansas" was specifically about Atchison and his men, about Atchison passing Kansas Act, rushing to Kansas, and there killing and torturing to spread slavery there.

For two days, Sumner listed crime, after crime, after crime, torture after torture, murder after murder -- done by Atchison's men.

And Sumner named Atchison --he also named Stephen A Douglas.   

Sumner named names.  Dates.  Exact facts. 

 He was talking specifically about Atchison and Douglas passing the Kansas Act --and then Atchison immediately going to Kansas.  Just the things I am telling you here, Sumner was telling the Senate (of course, they knew it all too well, already).

Sumner was beaten immediately after the speech.

He would have been beaten DURING the speech, but the Senate was closed, the door to the Senate guarded.  

Your history teacher will tell you Sumner was beaten for making remarks about another Senator's wife. What your history teacher does NOT know is Stephen A Douglas already told Sumner he should be beaten like a dog.  

Douglas was the guy -- with Atchison - who got Kansas Act passed.

So Atchison's role in Kansas Act, then his terrorizing and killings in Kansas,  should not be a surprise to anyone now -- it was extremely well known then. 

It is not trivia.  The man who got Kansas Act passed rushes -- immediately after passing it -- to Kansas.  He there terrorizing, later kills, to spread slavery there.  Not just to spread slavery -- Atchison is also killing to silence all opposition to slavery.

Atchison and his men made it a crime -- punishable by torture and or jail -- to publish a newspaper against slavery.

I can't help it if your teacher didn't tell you.  Not my fault.

I'm telling you now.  










This was no secret -- Southern leaders could not be more proud of it. They could not be more loud about it.  They could not be more clear about it.

They spread slavery -- and spread it for GOD. They spread it so the white race "would not be exterminated". 

Most people, even history teachers, have this idea that the South was for states rights.   That's simply not true, and never was true.  Kansas citizens, Davis insisted, had no right to reject slavery, even though they voted against slavery by overwhelming numbers.   And Davis further insisted -- bragged actually -- about invading the North and enslaving all free blacks in the North.


To a large extent, the stupidity of the American public about the Civil War is directly related to US textbooks, which were produced largely by Southern companies -- and even more, Southern school boards were and are notorious for simply not allowing basic and ugly truths inside text books.

Rather than make two different sets of text books, one for the South, one for the North, text book companies just avoided the ugly things.  Therefore no US text book has every put in Southern War Ultimatums, or Davis Address to people of the North, nor Atchison's boasts of killing to spread slavery.

Nearly everything is "whitewashed" to protect religion lunacy.  No mention that Southern leaders boasted they obeying GOD by enslaving blacks, and that torture of slaves was ordained by God.

Instead -- some nonsense about South cared about states rights.  Sounds better, but was never true.  


When Atchison and his men could not terrorize people at the voting booth, Kansas white males voted 95% against slavery.

But that did not matter. In fact, Atchison went to Kansas, and Davis paid his men, to force slavery into Kansas precisely because most people in Kansas were against slavery.   The entire point of the Kansas Act, and later Dred Scott decision, was  to push slavery into Kansas and beyond, by force.

 Not kinda. Not sorta. Not in a way.  They did what they did -- and they bragged about what they did - until they lost. 

We just don't teach this.  We have whitewashed the role of the bible and how Southern leaders boasted they were doing the will of God -- torture of slaves, was the will of God.

Spreading slavery -- was the will of GOD.

Not a few nuts in a church.  These are the leaders of the Confederacy. The men actually in charge.  Not some "gotcha" quote out of context. Their own clear explanations, repeatedly bragged about --  TILL THEY LOST. 

After they lost, and all the time since, Southern leaders themselves and their children, grandchildren, the "historians"  and pundits who followed, gave a drastically cleaned up story.  

Atchison worked officially  for Jefferson Davis.   Atchison sent written reports to Jeff Davis on the progress of his killing sprees.  Davis paid Atchison, and officially named Atchison as "General of Law and Order".


Remember this -- because Foner, McPherson, and a dozen other "historians"  never make this clear.   Atchison was not only killing and bragging about it, in Kansas,  Atchison worked officially for Jefferson Davis.

Their goal was simple:  Force slavery into Kansas and the entire West  against the will of the white people there. 

As you will see, 95% of the white male citizens in Kansas were against slavery.  Yet Atchison and Davis hired killers to invade Kansas repeatedly, to force slavery into Kansas and beyond.

No one even pretended Kansas citizens were for slavery.  Stephen Douglas said that 19 out of 20 people in Kansas were likely against slavery.

Do you know how many slaves there were in the ENTIRE Kansas territory, according to the census?  

Two. Let me repeat that -- two. Two slaves in the entire state, according to the census.

Do you know how many folks living in Kansas wanted slavery there?  Virtually none of the citizens.  Most of those who ended up killing and torturing to spread slavery were from elsewhere -- and most hired.

Remember that.  Hired.  But those men had weapons, and they were working for Atchison.  Atchison himself did not admit it. He boasted of it. 

Atchison had to import-- pay and import -- his killers, his tuff guys.  When Atchison could not hire enough Missouri men to do the terrorizing and killing, he took out ads in Texas and South Carolina.

So of course your text books are not going to mention Atchison had to hire his killers.  There was little or no "organic"  or actual local public support for slavery in Kansas --remember in more than one election, over 90% of citizens in Kansas (white males) were against slavery.

The few folks in Kansas who were pro -slavery, absent Atchison's money and pumping up the hate--did not support slavery enough to kill to spread it.

That's basic- - and that should be taught as a basic. 

Atchison had to hire people to terrorize, he had to hire the people to kill.   Don't forget that. Your history teacher almost certainly has no clue about it. 


Let me repeat that -- Atchison bragged about it and so did his official publications and his friends.  They were boasting of killing to spread slavery, until they lost. 

Atchison never wasted his time claiming most people in Kansas were for slavery.

Jefferson Davis never wasted his time claiming most people in Kansas were for slavery.

They knew damn well  most people in Kansas were against slavery --that was the entire point of sending killers and thugs there -- to force slavery down their throats. 

No one should leave a US history class  without knowing this basic truth.  Southern leaders knew it-- and acted upon this basic truth.  People in Kansas did not want slavery. 

'Oh there are always a few extremists "

Typically -- because the vast majority of  history teachers have no clue what Atchison did -  people will claim, upon hearing about Atchison, that "there are always some extremists"   and pass Atchison off as some guy talking big.

And Atchison was not "talking big".  He actually hired the killers, actually got Kansas Act passed (with Douglass)  actually went to Kansas, actually boasted he was killing to spread slavery -- as he killed to spread slavery. 



Everything Atchison did -- said Jeff Davis in a written response after the Civil War was over -- was "Constitutionally required." 

Yes, of course Foner, McPherson, Catton, and 100 other "historians" should have made this clear.   A sustained violent effort to kill and torture enough to spread slavery against state's rights, by the top Southern leaders -- that's a BFD.

  Not my fault McPherson and others apparently refused to make this clear.    Southern War Ultimatums, of 1856 and 1861, should be on the front page of every US history text book.   Atchison's speech and Davis defense of Atchison's killing sprees should be clear in every student's mind who graduates high school.  This is the most basic fact leading up to the United States Civil War.

 Yet you won't find it even mentioned in any text book we have seen. 
Certainly Southern War Ultimatums are not taught -not part of the general knowledge of most history teachers in high school or college.    







And Davis too -- like Atchison -- made it clear.  They were killing to SPREAD slavery. Not to keep it where it was.  They were killing to S P R E A D slavery.  Not sorta, not kinda, not in a way.

Atchison: "I will see Kansas in hell before I let it be a free state."

95% of the white male citizens of Kansas were anti -slavery, and voted that way. 

Aitchison and Davis sent or hired killers to force slavery into Kansas.  

Jefferson Davis insisted, and paid the killers to go to Kansas -- that Kansas must "accept and respect" slavery even after Kansas became a free state in 1861.

Congratulations -- you now know more basic history about the US Civil War than most high school history teachers.  Southern leaders were still sending killers to Kansas all through the US Civil War.


  High school history teachers, through no fault of their own, teach  these killings, tortures and war ultimatums in bizarre and misleading euphemistic terms, such as "Trouble in Kansas".

From our research --we have not found one high school text book in the United States that has the basics right.

Not one mention of David Rice Atchison passing Kansas Act then rushing to Kansas, and there terrorizing, later killing, and boasting of killing to spread slavery.

Not one mention of Jefferson Davis paying Atchison and his men to invade Kansas.

Not one mention of Southern War Ultimatums of 1856 or 1861.

Virtually no high school -- and few college -- teachers even know what Southern War ULtimatums were, who issued them, or what Southern leaders bragged about at this time.

Davis:   The resistance to slavery in Kansas is "the intolerable grievance"

Remember -- 95% of the citizens of Kansas were against slavery there.  That was "the intolerable grievance"  that Davis claimed justified sending Atchison and over 2000 men to invade Kansas, and try to force slavery there.

Sound like state's rights to you?

Sound like "popular sovereignty  to you?



  State's rights did not apply to slavery -- said Jeff Davis himself.  He explained his (twisted) "logic"  very clearly, in his own book, and in his own official announcements. 

Dred Scott -- claimed Davis in writing -- changed everything.  The "august justices"  on the Supreme Court had ordered (yes, ordered) that blacks are not human beings (not persons)  and are to be seen as property.

No one even pretended that the white male citizens of Kansas wanted slavery.  It was well known otherwise.  But the "majority" does not rule on slavery, the majority can not interfere with the rights of slave owners to take their "property" where they wanted to take it.  

This is what Jeff Davis was talking about  when he said "Neither current events nor history show that the majority rules, or ever did rule."   Even after Kansas citizens voted 95% against slavery -- remember that, even after they voted against slavery, after they became a free state -- Jeff Davis demanded Kansas be a slave state.   He didn't sorta demand it, or just wish it, or say it should be a slave state.  He sent over 1000 men there, paid them,  and paid Davis Rice Atchison,  to force slavery (force by killing, torture and terrror) into Kansas and beyond.

So any stupid fucker -- this includes Foner, McPherson, Bruce Catton, Shelby Foote -- who even hints that Jeff Davis and the South were for state's rights - should be bitch slapped. 

As property, the government must protect slavery,  regardless of the votes by Kansas citizens,  regardless of any Kansas legislation or vote, and regardless of any congressional ruling otherwise.  The will of the people in Kansas did not matter-- because of Dred Scott decision.

 Davis made this as clear as he could -- loudly, proudly repeatedly.  Kansas citizens had no right to keep slavery out -- not  out of their state, not out of their territory. 







 Atchison was already famous for the Kansas Act -- he bragged later that he made Douglas (who rejected Kansas Act as vile, at first) push Kansas Act through Congress.

Yet most high school and college text books idiotically show Kansa Act as some kind of effort to allow the people in Kansas to "decide for themselves"   or have "popular sovereignty."

Atchison and Douglas said that, yes.   Over and over they said it. 

But then Atchison went immediately to Kansas and started terrorizing, later killing -- not only did Atchison stop all voting against slavery, he actually made it a crime to speak publically or publish anti-slavery newspapers.  

Lincoln -- and hundreds of others -- immediately and loudly pointed out the fraud.  In fact, those who knew Douglas personally, and knew Atchison personally, were quite clear in advance, they knew Kansas Act was a fraud, and was actually a fraud designed to further slavery into Kansas.

Lincoln repeatedly, clearly, and correctly pointed out the absurdity of Kansas Act as some kind of measure to allow people to decide slavery themselves  -- because those who pushed it through immediately resorted to violence to STOP people from deciding the issue.  See Lincoln's speech below! 

Sound like Atchison was letting the Kansas residents be "perfectly free"  to decide themselves?

Lincoln had it right -- he said (as did many others) that Kansas Act was exactly the opposite of what it was sold as.  It was actually "machinery"  as Lincoln called it, to push slavery into Kansas and beyond,   And he was 100% right. Not 99% right, 

He was 100% right right.

Sumner's speech was about that -- how Atchison and Douglas passed the Kansas Act, then Atchison went to Kansas to start his "reign of terror"  as newspapers in Kansas called it.

Charles Sumner -- in the speech called "Crimes Against Kansas"  -- was beaten nearly to death.  He spoke for two days about ATCHISON!  About Atchison and his men in Kansas.  Sumner listed over 100 details of the killings and tortures  committed by Atchison's men.

So yes, Atchison was very well known. I can't help it if your "history" teacher never mentioned that, or didn't know.   Not my fault.

The point to remember about Sumner's speech ? 

1) Stephen A Douglas laughed during the beating

2) Atchison killing sprees were about to get much worse.


Atchison pressured Stephen A Douglas into pushing Kansas Act through Congress -- then Atchison, Jefferson Davis, and Stephen Douglas personally took the Kansas Act to President Pierce to sign.    

See Kansas in Hell

Not a secret -- widely known, North South, West.  From 1856 there was little else written about in newspapers, or spoken about in speeches. 

Like this newspaper in Kansas.

Atchison's  "reign of terror" in Kansas was national news.  Southern states spoke of "their rights in Kansas"- - as if they had the right to send over 2,000 killers to Kansas to force slavery there. 

Lincoln literally got back into politics because of what Davis Rice Atchison (and his partner, Stephen Douglas) did,  pass the fraudulent Kansas Act, and then have Atchison rush to Kansas (as he did) and start terrorizing, later killing, in Kansas.

If anyone tells you, in any way, that Southern leaders cared about "state's rights"  you can be sure -- absolutely positive -- that they have no clue what happened.   

Southern leaders were not just against states rights in theory -- they  sent killers to Kansas -- over 2,000 -- to stop citizens of Kansas from voting against slavery, and even to stop them from speaking against slavery.  

They not only talked (in war ultimatums, for example)  they made good on their threats of killing, and promises of violence.   Atchison said he would "See Kansas in hell"  before  he let it be a free state.   Then he went to Kansas and tried his best to either send Kansas to hell, or make it a slave state. 

If Kansas were not 95% against slavery -- then and later -- Atchison probably would have gotten the job done.  But he sure as hell -- and other Southern leaders were also sure as hell -- not for state's rights, when Kansas rejected slavery.    The Civil War itself is proof that Southern leaders not only would go to war to spread slavery into Kansas and the West -- but that they DID go to war to spread slavery.

I can't help it if your favorite "historians"  didn't tell you this in any clear way -- not my fault.   I am telling you what Southern leaders did at the time, and what they bragged out the ass about.

Loudly. Proudly. In context.  Repeatedly.   

Not sorta, not kinda, not in a way.   

Let me repeat that -- Southern leaders sent killers to KS when Kansas tried to reject slavery.   KS rejected slavery repeatedly -- and eventually (despite violent efforts of Southern leaders) became a free state, just before Lincoln became President.

Even then -- remember this -- even after KS became a free state officially, even AFTER KS voted 95% against slavery, Southern leaders (Jefferson Davis for example)  issued War Ultimatums.  Not just de facto war ultimatums by their actions, but repeated War Ultimatums by their words.

From Jefferson Davis's own book, Rise and Fall.   Would it be too much to ask for "historians" like McPherson and Foner, who clearly read Jefferson Davis own book and knew very well of his war ultimatums, to mention this is a clear way? 

This was the cause of the Civil War -Southern leaders should know, they were not only doing the killing, they were boasting of it. 

The documents I show are not by someone trying to make Southern leaders look insane  -- they are BY Southern leaders boasting of it.  

Southern leaders boasted of killing to spread slavery.  They were no coy or embarassed or shy.  Atchison and Davis particularly were violently committed to spread slavery into Kansas and beyond, even when 95 % of the people in Kansas were not only against slavery, but had voted against slavery, and got accepted into the US as a free state.

So basic is this that every history  text book in the USA, this should be on page one, and actually explained explained in detail.  Southern War Ultimatums were a big deal -- and Lincoln refused, of course, to obey them.





More than anything, people need to understand this.   AFTER  Kansas became a free state, Southern leaders issued War Ultimatums that Kansas had to accept slavery.

The resistance to slavery in Kansas was "intolerable".  Yet there is not one history text book in the USA, that we know of, that explains this clear. AFTER Kansas became a free state, AFTER they voted 95% against slavery, Southern leaders still demanded, as a War Ultimatum, that Kansas must accept slavery.

When Lincoln said we will be all free states or all slave states, this is exactly what he was talking about. If the South could force slavery into Kansas, that same "mechanism" could force it into all states, North and South, East and West, regardless of the preferences of the people in those places. 


That is why Atchison had to hurry to pass Kansas Act in DC, then hurry to Kansas himself. 

The same week Sumner was beaten almost to death after speaking about Atchison and his "Crimes Against Kansas"  Atchison himself was actually in Kansas making his own speech -- see below.   He was urging his men to kill, promising them the gratitude of the South, "ample pay' and the "loot"  they could steal. 

The same newspapers that carried the story of Sumner being beaten almost to death, carried the current "other story" -- Atchison in Kansas terrorizing there.   Remember -- both speeches happened within one week of each other.

Atchison was boasting of doing exactly what Sumner accused him of doing. 



In Atchison's speech he boasts about killing, he boasts about killing to spread slavery "for the entire South".     

This was not a speech to the Senate, where Atchison told that group the Kansas Act was to give he citizens "perfect freedom"  to vote on domestic institutions (a euphemism for slavery).    To his men, once Atchison got there, he didn't need to pretend.   He was there -- and he was paid, and he was officially "General of Law and Order".

He boasted he was there "for the entire South"

There is no substitute for reading his speeches, at the time, and  for reading his own newspapers, and supporting newspapers, at the time.   Yet there is not a single text book in the United States that we know of that even mention's Atchison's speech, much less shows it.  

The speech was more important than any Lincoln gave during the 1850's.    The speech - and Atchison's actions - set into motion everything that followed.  It should be, therefor, as commonly known and referred to as any speech in the 1850s.    That "historians" such as Foner, McPherson, Catton, Foote, and dozens of others, don't even mention what Atchison did, in any clear way, nor show his speech and war ultimatums (yes, he made war ultimatums)  is one of the more awful bits of stupidity on the parts of those historians. 


Atchison speech  was a "pep talk"  to his men just before the first (of three) invasions of Lawrence Kansas.    Atchison made it clear they would spread slavery not only into Kansas Territory, but in all of the West, including California (California was already a free state).

Then Atchison led his paid men (paid by Jefferson Davis, no less) into Lawrence for one of three invasions of that city. 

In other words, Atchison was boasting of doing that which Sumner accused him of.  More importantly -- Atchison and his men were about to get much more focused and violent.   Atchison's men killed John Brown's son, Frederick, and promised to kill John Brown and the rest of his family.   When Atchison's paid men arrived (over 1000 of them)  Atchison did not need to rely on "ruffians" from Missouri.  

Here is a picture of the survivors of Atchison first raid into Kansas.

 Chances are, your history teacher can't tell you what Atchison didid, though he bragged his ass off about then, and his own newspapers (he had his own newspaper) bragged about it.   

Atchison is the reason Lincoln got back into politics. When Atchison pressured Stephen A Douglas to pass the Kansas Act, Lincoln (and others) saw the fraud.   Atchison and Douglas told the country that their legislation would make Kansas "perfectly free"  to decide their "institutions"  themselves.

Yet then, after passing Kansas Act, Atchison rushed to Kansas and there started terrorizing, later killing, to make sure Kansas white male citizens could not vote against slavery -- or even speak publically or publish a newspaper against slavery.

And Atchison boasted about that.  Remember this, Atchison boasted about it -- see his speech below.  He boasted he was in Kansas to kill. He boasted he was in Kansas to stop newspapers from speaking against slavery.   He didn't admit it -- he bragged about it. 


Atchison had left the Senate by 1856-- but was still called "Senator"  while others called him "General".  Why "General"?

Importantly, Atchison worked officially for Jeff Davis.  Atchison was paid by Jeff Davis.  Atchison's men were paid by Jeff Davis. And Atchison sent reports to Davis on the progress of his killings there. 

 REMEMBER Atchison was -- officially -- "General of Law and Order" in Kansas.   Jefferson Davis said everything Atchison did was "Constitutionally required".


Lincoln and Atchison

Atchison  got Lincoln back in politics. And rightly so. Atchison was officially "General of Law and Order" in Kansas, and referred to as such in newspapers.

But even more than that -- Atchison was the guy who got the Kansas Act passed, as he himself boasted of in writing at the time. Stephen A Douglas wanted  no part of Kansas Act fraud--  and it was a fraud -- until Atchison forced Douglas to push it through with him.


The great untold story of the Kansas Act...

Atchison got Kansas Act passed - with the help of Stephen A Douglas.  When Southern leaders first demanded Douglas pass Kansas Act, he refused. 

Then Atchison had a little "talk" with Douglas. 

When Atchison and Douglas got Kansas Act passed, they went to the President (Pierce) and had him sign the Kansas Act.  Guess who they went with, to get the Kansas Act signed?

A guy named Jefferson Davis.    Then Atchison quit the Senate, went to Kansas personally.    There, in Kansas, Atchison led a group of Missouri men to terrorize -- and later kill -- citizens in Kansas for even speaking (yes, speaking) against slavery.    Atchison and his men made it a law that publishing anti-slavery newspapers was a crime.  Atchison arrested, tortured, and even killed folks who disobeyed this law. 

This is Atchison's own newspaper at the time, boasting about it.


That's when Abraham Lincoln got involved. 

 Lincoln, and many others, had Kansas Act pegged correctly from the first hint of it.   Atchison is the one that got it passed.  
Lincoln said "Judge Douglas from his much vaunted doctrine of self-government for the territories; but this is only additional proof of what was very plain from the beginning, that that doctrine was a mere deceitful pretense for the benefit of slavery.

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

And it almost worked. 




Lincoln was not wrong on the Kansas Act.  Atchison's own killing sprees after he passed Kansas Act show that.  The man who got Kansas Act passed -- so the citizen there would be "perfectly free"  was the guy leading and paying the killers in Kansas, and boasting of it.  

Atchison had two partners-- one, Stephen A Douglas, who helped Atchison pass Kansas Act. 

 The other Jefferson Davis, who officially named Atchison as "General of Law and Order" in Kansas.  Davis also paid Atchison and his paid men from Texas and South Carolina. 

It took five years and a war to get Kansas in as a free state. Kansas citizens voted 95% against slavery.


It was common knowledge at the time.

South was killing to spread slavery into Kansas and beyond.

This speech was all about Atchison, his hired men, and what they were doing, who they were killing and torturing, in Kansas.

Every. Word. 

Drawing at the time.

✓  Atchison's partner -- Stephen A Douglas --
 shown laughing as  Sumner was being beaten.

We show you Atchison's speech.

Atchison's speech -- given the same week as Sumner's speech.
Atchison is boasting of killing to spread slavery.
Charles Sumner exposed what Atchison already did.


Ironic?   Not really. Try fraud. 


Atchison and Douglas passed Kansas Act by saying they wanted Kansas citizens to be "perfectly free" to decide their institutions themselves.

Remember that - "perfectly free".  Those are their buzz words, at the time.  But they added a bit of a "qualifier"  in time, as you will see.  "Subject only to adjustments by the Supreme Court".

  "Subject only to adjustments by the Supreme Court".

Subject to "adjustments"  by the Surpreme Court.

Douglas came up with the "subject to adjustment"  seve
The Supreme Court "adjusted"  Kansas Act three years later  BY DRED SCOTT decision, which ordered the federal government to protect slavery in Kansas, even after Kansas voted 95%  against slavery.  That's the famous "Dred Scott decision".

By the "logic" of this decision -- remember 95% of Kansas citizens were against slavery -- no state could keep slavery out.  If they could force slavery into Kansas by this logic, there was no place they could not push slavery.  Lincoln explained this dozens, if not hundreds, of time. 


Opponents knew immediately Kansas Act was an effort to spread slavery  - -because they knew Atchison and Jeff Davis. 

It took others a little while, but only until Atchison reached Kansas and started terrorizing, later killing, and boasting of it.


When Atchison and Douglas first started to pass Kansas Act,  people who knew Atchison and Jeff Davis knew exactly what was going on.

Over and over men like Charles Sumner tried to get language in the Kansas Act which gave the people there the clear right to reject slavery.   Atchison, Douglas, (and Jeff Davis, off stage) rejected any such language.   Just believe us -- they will be   "perfectly free" to reject slavery.

It became clear a few weeks later  ---when Atchison reached Kansas and started the violence there -- that the Kansas Act was very much the ruse they had warned about.   

And Kansas - Nebraska was not all they were killing for.  As Atchison made clear himself -- they would spread slavery to all of the  West.

Slave power already had the land in white border

Kansas was off limits

The land Southern War Ultimatums
And Atchison
Demanded -- bordered   in red.

Atchison's critics knew Kansas Act was exactly the opposite of Atchison and Douglas  claimed.  


Douglas insisted Kansas of course would vote to be a free state -- 19 out of 20 people there, he said (correctly) were against slavery. He idiotically insisted  the "climate" was wrong for slavery anyway. 

He was motivated, he claimed, by his "profound respect"  for "popular sovereignty"     He just wanted Kansas to have that "perfect right" to vote slavery up or down. (Actually Douglas didn't give a damn about popular sovereignty -- Atchison was going to take away Douglas's Chairmanship of Kansas Committee,  which was the source of much money and power to Douglas). 

Atchison could not get to KS fast enough to make sure they could not possibly vote against slavery.   First thing Atchison did there was to intimidate any one in Kansas from voting, and he brought over 1000 men from Missouri, who voted repeatedly.   

Then Atchison used the same high regard for democracy to have his own "legislature" declare it a crime to publish anti-slavery publications. 

And it almost worked.   It took the Civil War to undo what Douglas and Atchison did. 

See Senator Atchison's speech below.  He boasted he was already at war "for the entire South"  in 1856.   He boasted the specific reasons he and his paid men were killing in Kansas. 

One of the most pernicious -- and stupid -- memes in US history as commonly taught, is that Southern leaders cared about state's rights.

You hear that all the time.

It's simply not true.  In fact, when Kansas rejected slavery repeatedly, Southern leaders sent a US Senator and thousands of men to Kansas, to force slavery into Kansas. 

Jeff Davis himself told the country about the "logic"  that Kansas can not reject slavery. Yes, he knew Kansas rejected slavery by overwhelming percentage.  He did not care.   See his "logic"  about sending killers to Kansas in 1856.

I doubt you heard about this from your history teacher.  Yet Jeff Davis explained it very well (from his point of view) at the time, and later. He wrote an entire book about it, with the central point being the South's right to SPREAD slavery -- into Kansas and beyond, state's right be damned.


Remember -- Kansas citizens were overwhelmingly anti-slavery.  They voted against slavery repeatedly -- by 90% and 95%. 

Even after (yes after) Kansas was a free state, Jeff Davis himself insisted Kansas must accept and respect slavery.   And more -- Kansas must PROTECT slavery.   Not only accept it, but protect slavery.

How much more clear could Davis  make it?  He actually wrote about it in his own book -- see below.


Actually Southern leaders hated states rights. And said so at the time.


How the hell have "historians" missed this?  Easy.  Seems historians are not immun 


When Davis said the majority does NOT rule -- he was talking specifically about Kansas and slavery  Just because a majority there were against slavery (95%)  that did not matter.

The Dred Scott decision, Davis said clearly, changed all that. 

Davis said that in 1857, 1858, 1859, 1860, and after the war, said it again. That was his justification for sending killers to Kansas under the control of David Rice Atchison.

Everything Atchison and his men did in Kansas was "Constitutionally required"  said Davis. 
Indeed, Davis was correct -- the Dred Scott decision did order, exactly as Davis said, that blacks may not be seen as human beings, but must be seen as property.  That changed everything.

States no longer, according to Davis,  had a right to reject slavery, any more than they could reject a person taking a dog or cow to any other place, the government MUST protect that property.

Very basic -- Davis not only made that clear in his book after the war,  he made this very clear before the war.     No matter what the vote was against slavery (95% against)  that did not override the Supreme Court, Davis insisted.  No matter what any legislature of Kansas decided -- that did not override the Dred Scott decision.

No matter what Congress would pass about slavery -- that did not over ride Dred Scott order that slavery was protected -- and the federal government must protect slavery!

Most history teachers have that  "state's right" term stuck in their head, and are proud of it. They should read Jeff Davis and David Rice Atchison at the time.

Not just read them, but learn what they were doing -- killing in Kansas. 

They both promised, in their own way, endless death and war until they could have slavery in Kansas and beyond.  Beyond meaning in the entire West, and even in the North.  See Jeff Davis own "address to people of the free states" --- where he makes it very clear he has the right to enslave blacks IN THE NORTH in retaliation for Lincoln using blacks as soldiers.

But the big justification for Davis was the  Dred Scott decision.  Davis did not suggest this, he made it emphatically clear.  Repeatedly.

See below. 

Atchison sent reports on the progress of the killings to his boss, Jefferson Davis.

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


Atchison's  killed John Brown's son -- drove another son insane by torture, and promised to kill Brown and his wife.  

Let me repeat that, they killed John Brown's son, Frederick.  They tortured another son till he went insane and sent him home to his mother. 

They then promised to kill Brown, and the rest of his family.

So when you hear how terrible Brown was -- first learn what they did to him, and promised to do. And what they were doing in Kansas in the first place. Atchison did not live in Kansas,

The men Atchison hired did not live in Kansas.  

They went to Kansas for one reason --  Atchison explained the reason "I will see Kansas in hell before I let it be a free state".

Atchison claimed Kansas had to be a slave state because otherwise "Nigger stealers"   will go into Missouri and fre the slaves in Missouri.

That was Atchison's "logic"  for trying to force Kansas to be a slave state.


  John Brown fighting back came as a surprise to Atchison and his men.  Atchison told the hired men that "Yankees"  were cowards and they would run away.    

Turns out -- not so much.



Atchison's immediate goal was to enforce his laws against public speaking and public newspapers against slavery. Atchison set up a "bogus legislature" which immediately made it a crime to publish anti-slavery newspapers. 

You should really, really, really read his speech. He covers this -- he makes it clear, they are shutting down the newspapers.   And they will see Kansas in hell before they let Kansas be a free state.

The long term goal -- Atchison made that clear, too.  To spread slavery into all of the West, including California, which was already a free state.


Until  Brown started fighting back -- Atchison was right.  Yankees did run away -- at first.   Atchison brought over 1000 armed men.  Not just armed, but they were violent, Atchison made sure they were pumped up to do violence. Atchison took newspaper ads out in Texas, and actually told them in the ads,  time for talk is over.  It's time for "action"  in Kansas.

It took a while for the citizens in Kansas to fight back. But they did. And when they did, Atchison lost many of his paid killers.  They signed up for easy money, and no one fighting back.   Atchison promised them they faced cowards.

He was lying about that. 

You now know the candid basics of what happened in Kansas. 

If your teacher says "We are going to talk about Trouble in Kansas'"   stop them right there, and say, "You mean Atchison in Kansas".  Because that is essentially what the trouble was-- David Rice Atchison, the guy Jefferson Davis sent to Kansas officially, and his hired 1000 men.

Atchison happened.  



Atchison passed the Kansas Act, with Stephen A Douglas, his partner. Then Atchison immediately went to Kansas, and there started what papers at the time called "reign of terror".

Atchison  was not "just another" US Senator.

He was President Pro Temp of the US Senate, and the man who got Kansas Act passed.   If you don't know how important Kansas Act was -- you have a lot to learn.  The point is -- he got it passed. He boasted he got it passed, and he got his business partner, Stephen A Douglas, to do most of the speaking on the Senate floor to do it.

Douglas also used his very powerful position as "Chairman of House and Senate Committee on Kansas"  to dispense patronage to push through the Kansas Act.

The important point here -- Atchison got Kansas Act passed, then immediately went to Kansas and started terrorizing, later killing, folks in Kansas.

You really need to read his speech -- more important than any of Lincoln's speeches, because without Atchison and his men terrorizing and killing in Kansas, Lincoln does not even get back into politics.

Lincoln literally got back into politics in 1854 because of what Davis Rice Atchison -- and Stephen A Douglas -- did.

It's is as basic as that.

The North was anti-slavery, and slavery was from GOD.  The North committed "grievous religious error".

And the solution?  Violence. Sending killers to Kansas, and pass laws that forbid speaking publicly against slavery, and making it a crime to publish newspapers against slavery.






To make Kansas "perfectly free"

Slavery = freedom.

Killing to stop free speech = perfectly free.

Atchison and Douglas both claimed they passed the Kansas Act so the people there would be "perfectly free"  to decide their "institutions"  themselves.  That's Orwellian double speak for slavery.

But Atchison immediately -- immediately - used violence in Kansas.  Why?  Because Kansas citizens had ALREADY voted against slavery and were already starting the process to officially become a free state in the US.

As Atchison said -- he and his men would have to move fast.  Not fast enough, it turned out, and not enough men, was the problem.

Another problem for Atchison's plan?  Atchison talked a great macho game himself, but invariably vanished  when it came time to actually use violence.  He sent the suckers ahead --and then never caught up with them.  Atchison did exactly the same thing in the Civil War.   Left for Texas, hid out the war, and came back after it was over, trying to act like a hero.   

That was rather typical, actually, for the Southern leaders who pumped up the hate and fear from 1855-1861.  In fact,apparently  no Southern political leader who pumped up the hate and fear before the war actually got into battle. 

Only their suckers did.

Funny how that works.

1st War To Spread Slavery 

The first war to spread slavery (though we are not taught this) was the Mexican American War.  Some Southern leaders admitted at the time it was a war to spread slavery. Lincoln knew it was a war to spread slavery and that the President - - Polk -- deliberately had US soldiers kill Mexicans, on their own soil,  then blame the Mexicans for starting a war.

To "avenge our honor"  Polk would steal much of Mexico.    
2We stupidly don't teach it in terms some Southern leaders made very clear at the time -- in their own words.  It was a war to spread slavery.   And that worked -- in that slave territory doubled.  And then doubled again in "Compromise" of 1850.  As Lincoln once said - "what compromise"  because slave power got all they wanted -- and once they had that, they went for more, as you will see.

2nd War To Spread Slavery 

The second war to spread slavery was the invasion of Kansas -- in 1854, by paid killers.   

 When the first set of paid men did not get the job done, Jefferson Davis sent over 800, then 2000 killers to Kansas, in 1858,  and that almost worked.  Here too, the Southern leaders admitted to,  bragged about, this was a war to spread slavery.

We stupidly don't teach what they bragged about and did - in terms they themselves explained it (killing to spread slavery-- boasting).

3rd War To Spread Slavery 

The third war to spread slavery -- and Lincoln tried to avoid that war too -- was the US Civil War. South actually issued two sets of War Ultimatums -- remember that, because your "history teacher" almost certainly won't mention it.  The South was already killing, already boasting they were at war -- and Atchison boasted he was starting the war.

The War Ultimatums demanded the spread of slavery.

  \Each time they were already killing to effect that Ultimatum

The point is the South was led by violent men -- men who could, and did, buy slaves, order slaves to be whipped, sold, and order them or their children to be sold.

Nor did slave owners tolerate dissent -- not from their slaves, not from newspapers or preachers or anyone in the South.  From 1840's on, it was illegal in the South to speak publicly, preach, or write anti-slavery books.  

Yes, even preachers could be - and were -- arrested and subjected to torture for not just speaking against slavery, but if they simply owned the wrong book, they could be and were arrested and subjected to public whipping.

I can't help it if you did not know that. This is what happened, and what the South was like. It was not a place of freedom of speech, even for whites. 

In fact, the killing sprees into Kansas  -- as you will see -- came about because a city in Kansas (Lawrence) allowed an anti -slavery paper to publish there.  And US Senator David Atchison made that very clear in his speech.


Torture of preachers for owning the wrong book --

To understand how violent the South was,  you can just learn about the torture you could face, even as a white preacher, for owning the wrong book. The details of this case are stunning -- a preacher did not even preach against slavery, but owned a book that questioned slavery. 

That was enough to get him arrested, tried, found guilty, and sentenced to public torture, then jail.  In this case, the old man was able to post bond, and slip out of the South before he was tortured -- and he left a disappointed crowd who gathered to watch him whipped.

Here is another example, a woman made an idle comment in Memphis on the street, about freedom in the North.  She was grabbed, stripped, and whipped in public in the middle of the street.

Slaves could be tortured just for the hell of it.

Or see Lincoln's speech about the amazing killing sprees in the South long before he ran for office. 

Owning slaves -- seeing slaves tortured, seeing women raped, children sold -- was not the kind of upbringing that made folks gentle and caring about rights of other humans -white or black.

Southern leaders were men who pumped up the hate -- the hate for abolitionist.


 The leaders themselves were more tough talkers, but they were good at tough talk. And they never did back down, they did not do the violence they promised, but they never issued a threat, not once, that they did  not send others to make good on.  

And that includes the two sets of War Ultimatums, one in 1856, the other set in 1861. 

Why on earth we do not teach Southern War Ultimatums is a travesty -- and stupid as hell.  The South was proud of them.

And they made good on their threats.

So why do we not even mention them, in any meaningful way>





Contrary to the nonsense in our text books -- Lincoln was hated by Southern leaders -- people in the North for "Niggerism and obsession with Nigger equality".

Yes, yes over and over, Lincoln (in public) was extremely kind and never insulted slave owners as lunatics, liars, war mongers -- all he could have said about them. 

In fact, Lincoln's style was such that he actually could argue his opponent's side better than they could -- and he would phrase their vile arguments (such as that blacks are not even human beings) in a way that did not cause violence on the spot.  And then refute that argument.  Here is a good example of a technique he used hundreds, or even thousands, of times.  

Lincoln was actually obsessed with equality -- when you know all his speeches and actions.  

Did you know -- or not -- that Lincoln said slave owners deserve to be kicked to death?