under construction...

Just the fact most high school kids -- if they even know this much -- think the US Civil War started in 1861, shows the shallow way we teach US history.

1861 was the second time South issued War Ultimatums and sent killers to various places, not the first time.  1861 is when the North could finally fight back.

By 1856 the South was already at war, and South leaders already called it war, in fact, Southern leaders already bragged they were at war -- a war to spread slavery, a bloody war they boasted of. And they were specific, clear, proud.

They were spread slavery in new places, even in places where the public was against slavery.


David Rice Atchison, on the right.  His partner in Senate for Kansas Act on the left, Stephen A Douglas.


Lincoln had not even yet run for Senate,  when Southern leaders sent over 1000 killers to Kansas, from Texas mostly, under the leadership of US Senator David Rice Atchison.

By what right did Atchison hire over 1000 men in 1856 to invade Kansas?  Because he could -- and he need the killers, as you will see, to force slavery into Kansas.  Ninety to 95% of Kansas citizens were against slavery.

The story of who Atchison was, and what he did, is the most important story of the 1850's.  Why the hell don't we teach it?


It's not your fault that did not know that the top Southern leaders-- including Jefferson Davis himself -- bragged about killing to spread slavery. 

Oh you might have heard a few words about "trouble in Kansas".    But there is not a high school teacher we know of, unless they teach drastically different than text books, that teaches who was killing who, and why, in Kansas.

Most history teachers seem to "blame both sides"  and stupidly tell their students nothing about Southern killing sprees and the leaders boasting about those killing sprees.

Nor do they even mention Southern War Ultimatums.

So of course, the "history" teacher would not mention or assign reading of Southern leaders boasting of killing to spread slavery.   Given what the teacher taught, such speeches would be baffling.  

Southern leaders did not just boast about killing to spread slavery a few times, here and there, in emotional outburst, they boasted of it while calm,  boasted of before Lincoln even ran for Senate, boasted of it before Kansas Act, and boasted of it officially.   And they kept boasting of it, in one way or another,  until they lost.

Atchison's speech was in May of 1856,  following other well known outburst and lesser killing sprees.   Yet the killings were so numerous, the tortures so numerous, that by May of 1856  Charles Sumner spent two entire days speaking in great detail, with names, dates, types of torture, who was killed, etc etc, in his famous "Crimes Against Kansas"

A better title would have been "Senator Atchison's Crimes Against Kansas",  because Atchison was the leader who literally hired the men from Texas, South Carolina and Alabama to come to Kansas in order to kill. And he boasted of it. 

On January 3, 1863, Davis himself boasted in writing -- "so there would be no misunderstanding in the future"  why he was using "by force of our arms"  to enslave blacks in the North.

You heard right -- in the NORTH.

Link to Davis official declaration

Davis promised perpetual slavery -- in the NORTH.  Let that sink in.


But this was not new, not out of character for Davis -- quite the reverse.

There was no outcry at the time Davis issued this proclamation to enslave blacks in the North -- Davis was actually consistent with his past actions.

Davis sent over 1000 paid killers (yes, killers) to Kansas in 1856 under the leadership of US Senator David Rice Atchison.  Why?

Atchison, Davis, and a guy named Stephen A Douglas got Kansas Act signed-- they personally went together to get President Pierce  to sign the Kansas Act, a story Davis himself repeated several times. 

Then Atchison immediately left Washington,  went to Kansas and personally used terror, starting in 1854,  to stop anyone from voting or even speaking publically against slavery.

Using his paid men as the "bogus legislature"  Atchison made it a crime to speak publically or publish anti-slavery newspapers in Kansas.  Speaking, preaching, writing newspapers or pamphlets against slavery  was already a crime  in almost all of the South. 

Atchison would decide who could vote, and even, who came into Kansas.  Atchison had US Army cannon, courtesy of Jeff Davis as Secretary of War, stationed at strategic roads into Kansas.  He made anyone entering Kansas swear an oath to support slavery. 

Kind of a big deal, right? 

And the first thing Atchison did with his "bogus legislature"  is make it a crime --a crime punishable by death --to publish things that  supposedly would cause slaves to escape.  In other words, almost anything against slavery would, according to men like Atchison, cause slaves to run away.

Atchison said he "would see Kansas in hell" before he let them be a free state.  He did not want "Nigger stealers"  to be near a slave state --  Missouri (by the same type of violence) was a slave state.

Atchison was in no way inventing a new technique to spread slavery.  Slavery always spread by violence and deceit, just like the one that almost worked in Kansas,. 

Remember -- or if you don't know  learn then remember-- 90% of Kansas citizens, then and later, were against slavery.   Atchison was there with paid killers because he knew that.

When you ask a history teacher about Kansas leading up to the Civil War, and they do not know this basic fact -- that 90% of the citizens there were deeply against slavery -- your teacher needs to learn more.  _____________________________________________

 One of the men they killed was John Brown's son -- which would soon backfire and apparently  caused Atchison to flee Kansas.  They also promised to kill Brown and his wife, and his other sons. When Brown started to "fight fire with fire" -- that changed everything.  Atchison's men did not expect armed resistance to their terror. 

Why doesn't your history teacher teach that?   Because they don't know it. They would have to actually learn from original documents -- like speeches by Jeff Davis, like speeches by David Rice Atchison. Our text books, and your teachers text books, never did show those documents.  And never did explain this in any candid way.

We are never told about those documents and speeches -- at least in any clear way.   You may, if you read hundreds of books, see a snip-it, a brief mention, but nothing clear.  

Not one word -- not one -- about Atchison passing Kansas Act then rushing to Kansas and terrorizing, later killing and boasting of it.

Not one word. 

Your text books has nothing like Southern leaders themselves at the time were making it so clear -- the documents were known at the time.  Remember, these guys were proud of it, until they lost.



Why the rebel flag was red in color

The first known speech by a Southern leader  about the rebel flag bragged was by Senator Atchison -- in that speech Atchison bragged-- bragged - the flag was red in color for the color of blood they would spill to spread slavery.

That's right -- bragged.  And he was very clear -- to spread slavery. Not keep slavery, they had a red flag for the color of blood to SPREAD slavery.


Not sorta. Not kinda, Not in a way.

Atchison boasted of it. 

Nor was this the only time, Atchison regularly boasted of things that not only have you never heard of, that Southern apologist, from the moment they lost,  dare not admit even  happened.

Literally, Southern leaders boasted of things then -- and killed, tortured as they boasted about --until they lost. And they were very clear, very specific.  They were killing to spread slavery, and spread it against (remember this) state's rights.

They well knew that 90% and more of Kansas citizens were against slavery.....that's the entire reason Atchison went there with his paid men, aided by Jeff Davis as Secretary of War, because they knew the overwhelming percentage of Kansas citizens were against slavery, they had to be quick and had to use terror and violence.



Atchison also boasted he got Kansas Act passed, boasted he forced Douglas into passing the Kansas Act, and boasted he was paid, and his men were paid,  "by the present administration".

Douglas at first refused to support, much less pass, the Kansas Act.  But within two days, Douglas did what Atchison demanded.... Turns out, Atchison threatened (as President Pro Temp of the US Senate)  to take away Douglas lucrative position as "Chairman of House and Senate Committee on Kansas.

Douglas who had railed in extreme terms that "no one would ever be so evil"  as to overturn the Compromise of 1850, now went "full monty" to trash the Compromise he helped pass, and to obliterate it with the Kansas Act.

Then, after he got Kansas Act passed, Atchison immediately left Washington for Kansas to terrorize, and later kill, to spread slavery there. 


Newspapers, of course, exploded with the news of Atchison in Kansas, and the killers sent by Jeff Davis.  This kind of article was a common type from Kansas that got back to Chicago and New York

They well knew what Atchison and Jeff Davis were up to in Kansas.  Sadly, Atchison and Davis claimed they were the "lawful authority" and could, did, create laws against even speaking publically, or publishing anti-slavery newspapers in Kansas. 

By the way, the first three governors of Kansas -- appointed by Jeff Davis, went to Kansas in total support of Atchison.

But when the first three governors got there, and saw what Atchison and his men were actually doing, all three governors turned against Atchison, reported Atchison to Jeff Davis, they found that Jeff Davis was behind it too.

All three of these men after a time refused to obey Davis and Atchison's orders to kill and to stop lawful assembly, free speech.

Remember that.

Lincoln himself wrote about this phenomenon  (in his "Speed letter)  of men Davis sent to Kansas who, once they got there  and saw the killing sprees by Atchison / Davis men, refused to cooperate.  Every one of them believed Davis and Atchison, until they got there and saw what was going on.

Remember, Davis picked these men, he told them they were upholding the law, and when they arrived in Kansas, they found just the opposite,  soon resigned after they refused to take part in the killing sprees and suppression of free speech

When Kansas did vote in an honest election, Jeff Davis insisted the people of Kansas did not get to decide slavery issues.   In fact, Jeff Davis wrote emphatically,  as he was wont to do, that the resistance to slavery in Kansas as "Intolerable"

From Louisville Courier 1855

Southern newspapers were overwhelmingly in favor of the killing sprees to spread slavery into Kansas, with Atchison as "General of Law and Order."

As far as we can tell, not one Southern paper ever reported that 90 and 95% of the people in Kansas had voted against slavery, nor that Atchison had, with Douglas, repeatedly insisted they passed the Kansas Act so that the people of Kansas would be "perfectly free" to decide slavery issue themselves.

Nor did they mention Atchison boasted of killing to spread slavery, the flag being red in color for the color of blood they will spill to spreads slavery, etc. 

It is amazing, the power to make people stupid, and then to make those stupid people do  the most vile things, just by lying to them, and making them believe it.

  If not for these three men,  and other Democrats who went to Kansas assuming Atchison and Davis cared what the people there wanted, then had the honor and integrity to refuse to be part of the fraud, Southern leaders get Kansas spread as they had always spread slavery -by violence and fraud.

This book "Conquest of Kansas"   is just one of many eye-witness accounts during that time.

 When  Phillips wrote this, he thought there was no hope, that Kansas and the entire West would be slavery states all,  because of Atchison, Douglas actions.  Phillips knew first hand the boasting about not just their ability to terrorize to spread slavery into Kansas, but to the rest of the West.

Even though the overwhelming percentage of people there were against slavery.

For several years, the people in Kansas were taken over by Atchison, his paid men,  who used US Army supplies, and even had their prisoners "guarded"  by the US Army.


The men doing the killings and tortures in Kansas under Atchison were not in the US Army.  They were paid by Atchison and Jefferson Davis.  As you will see, when men in Kansas finally got organized, they fought back, and Atchison himself left, as did many others.  When the hired killers faced opposition, and when they were no longer paid, because Jeff Davis lost his "Secretary of War"  position in 1858, everything changed.


If you omit a  few dozen facts like that -- the speeches and the killings, the invasions, and the tortures -- you have a much easier time, like Foner and McPherson or Catton or Shelby Foote, or 100 others,  making up lofty bullshit about "a conflict between states rights and central government".

Atchison and Davis --remember this -- hated, hated, states rights when Kansas rejected slavery.  Even after Kansas became a free state, Atchison and Davis still demanded the spread of slavery into Kansas specifically.

And Kansas voted -- remember this too -- 90 and 95% against slavery.  Yet Southern leaders not only sent the killers to Kansas, not only issued two sets of War Ultimatums (1856 and 1861),  even after Kansas was clearly and officially a state in the Union, a free state, they both sent or led killlers to make, by force, Kansas "accept and respect slavery".

The ugly truth was this -- Southern leaders fought wars, repeatedly, to spread slavery. And to spread it against state's rights, not for states rights.

Don't ever let your stupid but well intentioned teacher say the South was for state's rights.  They hated states rights, and killed to stop it, over time, repeatedly.

And they bragged about it, until they lost.


DO FACTS MATTER TO "Historians"?

This is a legitimate question.  Do facts matter to historians?

Or do they just love their own narratives?

That's a judgement call, but you can't help wondering how much facts actually matter if you artfully dodge the very facts that destroy your narrative.

Yet Southern leaders were not just talking, not just bragging.  They were, in each case we show you, actually killing, actually declared war and started the killings, before they bragged about -- and as they bragged about it.

What did they brag about ?

They bragged about killing to spread slavery - and spread it against (yes against)  state's rights.

Why don't we learn that - they bragged about it.  They even issued official declarations to that effect.

Can we trust our own text books -- or even the likes of History Channel -- for accurate basics on what started the US Civil War?

Maybe.  Maybe not.


Original sources do matter -- who knew?


Original sources, including Southern books, speeches, newspapers, letters,   show the most amazing things.

Things  never -- never  -- taught in our schools, at least not in a serious candid way.  Maybe a sentence here, a comment there, but this was not trivia -- it was CENTRAL.


Southern leaders boasting they created the first country on earth to be based on white's right to enslave and PUNISH  -- yes  PUNISH blacks for biblical sins.

That was not by some nut in a bar.

That was the Vice President of the Confederacy in a series of speeches -- a speaking tour -- right after the Southern states formed the Confederacy.

Alexander Stephens, the VP,  went on this speaking tour to explain what they had just done in Montgomery.  And their goals.

Crowds cheered. 

Stephens boasted- - boasted -- the Confederacy was based not only on God's intention for whites to enslave blacks -- in perpetuity no less, but that Africans were being punished for biblical sins.  Slavery was payback by God, in crude terms, for the actions of blacks two thousand years ago.

And the Confederacy was based -- the only country on earth ever to be  based -- on the will of GOD for whites to enslave blacks. 

He boasted -- remember this -- he boasted the Confederacy was based on this "great moral truth"  and predicted like all truths, this truth the Confederacy would spread to all of the  world.

That was not one speech -- that was a series of at least five speeches, and crowds cheered.

They cheered.

History channel has never covered this.

No re-enactment of any of these things.  If you watch History Channel, for history, you would be necessarily stupid about history of the Civil War.


No US textbook even mentions what these Southern leaders bragged about. 


Yet bragging is the least of what they did, because they also did, and were doing, what they bragged about-- killing to spread slavery.

They actually did what they boasted of.  

        US Senator David Rice Atchison
   author of the "Kansas Act".

Just one of many documents where Southern leaders at the time bragged of killing to spread slavery -- and kill to spread slavery against state's rights.

Newspapers showing Jeff Davis and others forcing slavery "down the throat of a freesoiler" --- a citizen from Kansas.

Remember -- 95% of citizens of Kansas not only voted against slavery, they became a free state because of that.  The men of Kansas fought a five year war against Atchison and his men.


US Senator David Atchison,  who pushed the Kansas Act through Congress, then immediately went to Kansas to terrorize, later kill torture and boast about killing to spread slavery "for the entire South".

He even boasted to his newly arrived hire men from Texas that the flag they would ride under, in 1856, was the "Southern flag" -- and it was red in color.

He said it was red for the color of blood they would spill to spread slavery.

He boasted they were there to spread slavery "for the entire South".

We show the speech below-- but it our history books did their job, this speech would already be common knowledge to every high school student in the United States.   The speech is more important, as a history lesson, than anything Lincoln ever spoke about, certainly more important to understand who did what than Lincoln's Gettysburg speech.




Atchison speech is important because  he bragged his motivation was to spread slavery "for the entire South".

Atchison said it clearly -- they had the hired men in Kansas is "For the entire South"  to spread slavery into Kansas now, then all the way to the Pacific.

Yet just months before, Atchison was in Washington promising folks that the Kansas Act was to "give the people of Kansas the perfect right"  to decide slavery themselves.

Many people, including Democrats of course, believed Atchison, and went to Kansas as settlers. Importantly, even Democrat Congressmen went to Kansas, assured that Atchison and Douglas's "Kansas Act" would allow the public to decide slavery.

Some of those Democrats who believed Atchison were eventually appointed by Jefferson Davis as governor of Kansas, while Atchison was made "General of Law and Order".

Those Democrats, including three governors, soon saw Atchison in action -- killing and boasting of it to spread slavery-- and quickly alerted Jeff Davis about what Atchison was doing.  Jeff Davis turned on these governors, fired them, and got new ones.

Some Democrats in Kansas contacted Lincoln later. Lincoln went to Kansas, met these men, and history was never the same after that.   A little known fact that these very Democrats, who flipped to Lincoln's GOP,  helped Lincoln get nominated, then elected, and helped fight for the Union in the Civil War.





Notice any difference?  Passing legislation that you promised would give people in Kansas the " perfect right"  to decide slavery as opposed to bragging about killing to spread slavery.

You can not hope to understand the history of this period unless you understand what Atchison was doing -- with the help of Stephen A Douglas.

Nor can you understand the Lincoln Douglas debates.  When you read the debates, unless you know that Douglas had passed the Kansas Act, and Atchison had already had several killing sprees in Kansas, already promised to keep killing to spread slavery against the will of the people in Kansas, and then to all of the West,  you won't  understand a word Lincoln in saying.

Because Lincoln was keenly aware of all this, as were most people, North and South, in the United States.

We often teach about the Lincoln Douglas debates in rather stupid terms, never telling our children the background, and what everyone knew the background was.

When Lincoln is trying in every debate to show the dangers of Kansas Act and Dred Scott decision, because they legitimize the violent spread of slavery, with no way to stop slavery from spreading where the people did not want slavery,  you are a lost puppy reading those debates.



 Senator Atchison, after he passed Kansas Act, personally went to Kansas, started by terrorizing,  to spread slavery.  That did not work as well as he wanted.

Late Atchison hired more than the original 800 or so men, and actually went to the South and advertised in newspaper for Southern men to come to Missouri to help fight in Kansas

"The time for talk is over"   Atchison wrote --  but Atchison never did try to "talk"  slavery into Kansas, other than by terror.

Here are newspapers from 1856 showing Atchison letters to Southern papers in 1855.

It did not take a genius for reader of these papers to realize -- the killings alreading going on in Kansas by Atchison's men were going to get a lot worse if many Southern men took the bait and hired out to Atchison.

Yet that is what happened.  And things got much much worse.  In fact, the speech we link to several times here is the speech to Atchison the first time he met these men that came from Texas, South Carolina, and Alabama.

Read the speech!  Atchison turned these foolish men, who might have numbered over 2000,  into the largest band of hired killers in US history,  and we should teach them as such.  



These newly hired men very nearly overwhelmed the citizens of Kansas- - if not for the stunning bravery and resolve of a man named John Brown.  The day after Atchison's killing spree using these men, Brown struck back.

Atchison men had already killed one of Brown's son -- Frederick, named after Frederick Douglas.

They tortured another of his sons to insanity.  They promised to kill Brown and his wife. 

The newly hired new men, fresh from Texas most of them, made it clear to Atchison supporters and the citizens of Kansas, that things just reached the kill or be killed stage.  

Atchison's men celebrated.  They now had the huge mass of men and horses they needed to do exactly what Atchison and his friends promised to do -- kill everyone against slavery.

Now that you know more about Atchison, after  he passed Kansas Act -- does it sound like he wanted Kansas Act to make the people there "perfectly free"  to decide slavery.

Don't forget that -- nothing is more basic.

Yet over, and over, and over, we stupidly teach the "Kansas Act" as being for "the right of people to decide"  or "popular sovereignty "  

Seriously, how stupid can you be?

Again and again, Lincoln pointed out the fraud of Kansas Act.  Did we think he was kidding?

Do we think Lincoln  did not know what Douglas and Atchison were doing?



No one at the time was as clever at Davis at using Orwellian double speak.  He could, and did, make listeners believe slavery was freedom, war was peace.  

Hard to believe, right? 

See Jeff Davis official declaration that he will enslave blacks in the North -he wrote in the declaration that he wrote it "so their will be no misunderstandings in the future"

See that official declaration HERE 

It is important you notice- Davis official declaration to enslave blacks in the North was in 1863, during the Civil War itself.

Davis already had a 20 year history of insisting slavery must spread, as a Constitutional right,  to wherever a slave owner wanted to take his "property".

That included Kansas, even after Kansas rejected slavery, and even after Kansas became a free state.

Davis is the one that sent Atchison to Kansas, the one that went with Atchison to get Kansas Act signed into law by the President, and the one that paid Atchison's 800 paid men, later over 2000 men.

So Davis was not just yapping. He was sending others to kill and die to make it happen. Don't forget that. 


Davis insisted that "state's rights"  did not apply to slavery because Dred Scott decision declared that blacks are not human beings -- not persons.   Lined up by Davis clever articulation of that absurdity, he made it seem reasonable to stupid people that killing to spread slavery against state's rights was not just allowable, but mandatory.

Davis, responding to written questions after the Civil War, responded to a question about Atchison's actions in Kansas. 

Everything Atchison and his paid men did in Kansas was "Constitutionally required" Davis wrote back.



Davis  famously said "All we ask is to be left alone" -- a quote of manifest and profound deception,  yet it's taught in high school and college, often with the stupid impression that is true, instead of the most damnable lie in US history.

Orwell much?  

 Why do we bother to even mention Orwell to our children, if we actually push Orwellian double speak and absurdities as fact, which happens when we quote Jeff Davis, or others, who do the same deceptions?   

At least give our students a fighting chance at knowing what happened.

By not including basic facts -- like Southern leaders killing to spread slavery and bragging about it, from 1855 on, and by putting up absurdities like Davis "All we ask is to be left alone,"   US text books make children -- and the public -- dumber, not smarter.

Stop that crap. Don't teach anything at all, schools would be better off simply not mentioning the word history in schools, if we are going to teach absurdities and deceptions as fact.


 Davis had sent over 2000 killers to KS to force slavery down the throats of the people in Kansas, led by David Rice Atchison.  This, despite he and Atchison knowing very well -- and the country knew-- that 95% of the citizens in Kansas were against slavery.

So -- unless you know what the hell he was doing, the smooth sound of Davis words bouncing around your head can make you functionally stupid about basic US history --it does not matter if you have a PhD in history, if you buy Davis utter nonsense, you are functionally stupid.

Even history teachers can read Jeff Davis books and speeches and think "well, that sounds reasonable."

Davis "forgets" to tell the readers he hired and sent the killers and boasted then that it did not matter what the people of Kansas wanted, or voted, even after they were a free state, Davis demanded the spread of slavery there.

A reader of his Orwellian double speak would have to already know, already have in their head, what the hell happened.  But most do not know well, and some do not have a clue.


Atchison's speech boasting of killing to spread slavery was not the only one, at all. 

Hundreds of other speeches, proclamations,  and documents, even books,  written by Southern leaders and slave advocates at the time said the same thing. 

Jeff Davis himself wrote that the resistance to slavery in Kansas (remember 95% of people in Kansas voted against slavery) was "intolerable".

If "states rights" were any concern whatsoever to Davis or Southern leaders, they would, of course, leave Kansas and other places alone.  Everyone- - including Atchison, Davis, and Stephen A Douglas were exceedingly aware Kansas citizens were outlandishly and clearly against slavery.



Southern leaders -- not the public nearly as much as the leaders in control -- were spreading slavery anyway,  many of them said they spread slavery for GOD as biblical punishment, like the Confederate Vice President told cheering crowds in the "Cornerstone speeches".

Others said they must spread slavery  White Survival.    Just stopping the spread of slavery would "exterminate"  the white race.

And they were spreading it by violence.

It was dramatic politics, perfect for the speeches by extremist like Davis -- who was NOT a moderate, no matter who tells you such nonsense.   To insist you can -- and should -- send killers to Kansas and force slavery there is not moderate.

It did not matter what the people of Kansas wanted, or voted, and did  not matter what their legislature said, it did not matter what Congress said.

That was Jeff Davis own "logic" for forcing slavery into Kansas and beyond, though 95% of the people there, and their legislature, voted against slavery.

And the "logic" was that blacks were not human beings -- they were property. 

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

At the time -- and  until they lost -- Southern leaders boasted about killing to spread slavery.   

They boasted in detail about the tortures and methods of killing.

 Sadly our text books, and many of our "historians"  have let them claim the South cared about state's rights-- and you can only let that Orwellian double speak pass as "history" if you omit Southern leaders boasting about killing to spread slavery, and of course, their actual killing to spread slavery,



That's not what they said then.

Funny how later -- they didn't boast about the killing to spread slavery for God.

Funny that later -- they didn't boast about their "logic" that Kansas had no right to reject slavery, even after Kansas was a free state, Southern leaders  demanded Kansas accept and respect slavery.

Funny that later -- they didn't brag, as they had, that they would get more men and kill all the way to the Pacific.  

Their words were ugly,  extreme and in context -- we must expand slavery or we lose slavery, even where it already is.

This "all or nothing"  way of pumping up hate was effective.  Most people did not want to expand slavery, but for money, and for fame, and responding to speakers like Atchison, Toombs, Stringfellow and others, many young Southern men -- for a price (they were paid) -- joined Atchison and other's efforts to spread slavery.

The way Atchison talked, Southern honor and Southern rights were at stake.  By "Southern honor" he and Jeff Davis, and most Southern leaders, meant "We will force slavery to spread -- it's our right to force it" 

People today stupidly think the South wanted to keep slavery.  Actually, they were killing to spread it.  


Atchison:  I will see Kansas in hell
 before I see it a free state"


Know what Jeff Davis "logic" was that he and Atchison could -- must -- pay men to go to Kansas and force slavery there?

He explained it repeatedly.   He explained why the South had every right to spread slavery into Kansas and beyond- - and the people of Kansas, 95% against slavery or not --did not have the right to stop them.

We show you, below


What role did Jefferson Davis play
in Kansas killing sprees?

✔ Jefferson Davis sent Atchison to Kansas.

Jefferson Davis paid Atchison.

✔ Jefferson Davis paid Atchison's 2000 men.

✔  Jefferson Davis insisted in writing -- it did not matter that 95% of Kansas citizens rejected slavery.

✔ Jefferson Davis insisted -- in writing -- Kansas citizens must accept and respect slavery -- even after they became a free state

✔  Jefferson Davis said, after the war, that everything Atchison did was "Constitutionally required

✔ Jefferson Davis himself boasted of sending killers North to enslave blacks during the civil war

✔ Jefferson Davis, Stephen A Douglas, and David Atchison personally took the Kansas Act to President Pierce to sign

✔ Jefferson Davis and Stephen A Douglas personally stayed in DC while Atchison rushed to Kansas after they passed Kansas Act, 

✔ In Washington, when reports of Atchison's killing sprees arrived -- including witnesses to the kiling to speak to the President -- Stephen A Douglas and Jefferson Davis made the President see those men as traitors and lawless. 


Jefferson Davis made Atchison the "General of Law and Order" in Kansas.  Atchison and his men were "well paid"  said Atchison, and they were paid by Jefferson Davis.


Atchison hired over 800 men to terrorize in Kansas, from the start. 

It's clear Atchison thought a quick powerful 800 man effort of bluster and threats -- taking over an election -- would do the trick.   He wrote to Davis, promising the problem would "soon be over.

But it did not work.  While Kansas men did run at first, they were not cowards as Atchison boasted.   Some did leave Kansas as Atchison hoped all the anti-slavery folks would leave.

But 95% of the citizens were against slavery, and soon the Kansas citizens got together and fought back.

To stop that, Atchison had to hire more and more men, so many men he could not find enough in Missouri willing to kill in Kansas for what he paid them.

Atchison had to turn to newspapers in Texas, South Carolina, and Alabama, mostly, to offer young men money and adventure "defending Souther rights in Kansas"






Atchison was able to hire, as best estimates can be, over 2000 men, and their goal, as he boasted of -- was to push slavery all the way to the Pacific. 



 Ninety-five percent of Kansas citizens were anti-slavery, and of course Atchison was keenly aware of that.

Stephen Douglas, Atchison's business partner and the man Atchison forced into being the main spokesman to sell Kansas Act,  said several times that everyone knew "19 out of 20"  Kansas citizens were against slavery.

To pass the Kansas Act, Stephen A Douglas and Atchison claimed they "just wanted the people of Kansas to have the perfect right to vote" on slavery.  

What could be more fair, more democratic, more American than that?   Anyone against the Kansas Act must hate the will of the people!  

Though Stephen A Douglas had helped pass Missouri Compromise, soon Atchison made Douglas the lead speaker to get rid of the Missouri Compromise. 

Under the "monstrous lie"  by Stephen Douglas and Atchison that the Kansas Act would let the people there be "perfectly free"  to decide slavery themselves,  many good people in Congress went along with the fraud -- later regretting it. 

Citizens of Kansas  would be "perfectly free"  to reject or accept slavery?

Un -- not so much.


Then, while Douglas stayed in Washington, Atchison left immediately after passage of KS Act, went to Kansas and started at first terrorizing all voting places available to him in Kansas.

Douglas and Jefferson Davis role in Washington, it's now clear,  was to keep the President stupid about what was going on with Atchison in Kansas. 

 The outcry was extreme, news and reports came in from Kansas -- people came from Kansas to personally tell Congress and the President what Atchison was up to. Newspapers talked of little else. It was as big, if not bigger, focus of US North and South, as 911 was when the twin towers were bombed in New York.

Instead of helping the citizens of Kansas be free to vote slavery up or down,  Douglas and Davis branded those who complained about Atchison were labelled as traitors, and disobedient to "lawful authority" in Kansas.

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

So Atchison was-- officially -- the law in Kansas.  It was clear to everyone that this was exactly the plan the whole time.

Davis also named a group of his supporters as Kansas governor, and other leading posts.  Davis also had control of the US military there in Kansas and in Missouri.Davis allowed Atchison to get guns and cannon -- any supplies he wanted, from the US Army,.

And Jefferson Davis paid Atchison and his men with funds from the US Treasury. 

So -- it was not just Atchison acting alone. 

And it almost worked.


 Atchison said in his advertising for Texas and South Carolina men to come to Kansas -- they were not there to talk -- time for talk was over.  They were to push slavery "for the entire South"  into Kansas and onto the Pacific. 

He never sought compromise -- he sought violent me who agreed to use violence.

It almost worked.  Southern leaders explained it very well-- including Atchison himself -- at the time.

Why not believe their own boasting of killing to spread slavery, as well as the overwhelming documented evidence that is exactly what he did?

Foote, of course, never told Ken Burns one word of what you are about to learn.




It's important to know -- and remember -- these were not suggestions, goals, preferences.  They were, and Southern leaders called them, ULTIMATUMS. 

Not sorta.

Not kinda.

Not in a way.

In fact, in both sets of war ultimatums Southern leaders had already been killing, before they issued the spoken or written ultimatums.


When Southern leaders boasted of spreading slavery to all of the West, in 1856,  starting with Kansas, 95 % of Kansas citizens -- as repeated elections would show  -- were against slavery.

California and Oregon were already free states. 

Kansas eventually became a free state in 1861,  after repeated overwhelming votes against slavery.   Even so, after Kansas became a free state, the first thing the Confederacy did, according to Southern newspapers boasting about it, was to issue War Ultimatums to spread slavery into Kansas.

Southern headlines called this -- THE TRUE ISSUE.



If the only thing Atchison boasted about was the Southern flag's color, that alone is worthy that it be studied in every history class in the United States, because  his speech is the first to describe the Southern flag.

The flag was red in color,  he said, for the color of blood -- blood they would spill to spread slavery.  Read his speech. 

Atchison's speech.

Atchison is one of many in power in South who bragged about killing to spread slavery. But bragged about much more -- who paid him, he bragged about. How far they would spread slavery, by violence, he bragged about.   

The flag was red for the color of blood, he bragged about.

Atchison was also the man who passed Kansas Act with Stephen A Douglas. In fact, Atchison pressured Douglas into passing it -- and he even bragged about that.   This was well known at the time

Newspaper in Kansas showing Atchison "compelled" Douglas to push Kansas Act through. Douglas was at first absolutely against it.   September 2, 1856.   But the same thing had been reported for years, and Atchison bragged about it.


Did you ever hear of Southern War Ultimatums of 1856 and 
1861.... both times Southern leaders issued War Ultimatums, they had already started killing to spread slavery.

Headlines in Richmond paper-- war ultimatus.  "THE TRUE ISSUE"  was the spread of slavery into Kansas.

Kansas was a free state by then.  Kansas people voted 90 and 95% against slavery, and now were a free state.

Yet the WAR ULTIMATUM was that Kansas much accept and respect slavery.

Southern leaders tended to be men who could get crowds to cheer  -- cheer about spreading slavery for GOD,  spreading slavery for "Southern Rights"

There was a time Southern leaders mentioned states rights --yes.  But when Kansas rejected slavery, Southern leaders in 1855 sent hundreds, then a thousand, then two thousand paid men into Kansas.

Davis gave the title  "General of Law and Order"  to his friend David Rice Atchison, in 1856.  Atchisonsent him reports on the progress of the killings. 


Atchison Speech of Joy

Our flag is red for color of blood we will spill to spread slavery

See Atchison's speech -- stunning, if you don't know the history well.  But not stunning at all, if you know what was going on from other sources.

They boasted -- boasted -- about killing to spread slavery, and actually killed to spread slavery.  



These were not "volunteers"  who killed to spread slavery, not local folks who deeply and horribly wanted slavery.   These were men Atchison paid -- paid.  You can see in his speech, they will be "well paid"   -- and they can plunder anything they like from the homes they attack.

Why not at least mention what Southern leaders were boasting about?

And what they doing!

Not only do our text books not say any of this clearly, if they speak of "trouble in Kansas"  they act like both sides were to blame.   You can only do that by not knowing what the hell these Southern leaders were doing-- and bragging about.

Even if a highschool or college "history teacher" is smart enough to know that Atchison was even there, that he passed Kansas Act, then rushed to Kansas, it's likely they assume many people in Kansas wanted slavery.

Hell no. Atchison, Douglas, and Davis were very very much aware that 95% of of citizens of Kansas were against slavery.

Jesus, you'd think history teachers would know that fact, but most seem clueless, because their text book doesn't tell them.



It is important you know this: They were NOT killing to keep slavery where it was. Over and over people will say the South "did not want to give up slavery".

That was not the issue --no one fought the war to make them give up slavery.  Ib fact,if South had simply gone on about their business -- as Lincoln said over and over --and not spread slavery, there would be no problem. 




Below we cover Lincoln actually going to Kansas and meeting Democrats who would help him get elected.

But Lincoln got back into politics because of  what David Rice Atchison did -- pass Kansas Act, then rush out to Kansas and terrorize, later kill, to spread slavery there. 


Even if you don't know, most people alive in Illinois knew Lincoln's long history of kicking slavery in the ass, years before Atchicons passed Kansas Act then went to Kansas to terrorize and kill.

Lincoln first tired to expose US going to war for slave power -- in Mexico,  Lincoln called the President (Polk) on starting the war based on a lie-- that Mexico attacked USA on US soil.

Of course, US forces were ordered to attack Mexico on MEXICO soil.

Lincoln asked Polk, from floor of Congress, to "show the spot"  where Mexico supposedly attacked.

Those were called the "Spot resolutions".  Polk, of course, just lied.

Lincoln was  hated -- called "traitor to the United States while soldiers were in the field"  kind of thing.  Even in Illinois people hated him for that.

Of course many others knew from the start -- it was an open secret that even slave owners admitted (like Henry Clay) that the Mexican War was done to double the size of slavery.

Lincoln had to, therefore, vote for funding for the soldiers, but he was against the war.


40 times

Then, 40 times Lincoln tried to outlaw slavery in the land we just stole from Mexico. Of course those who orchestated this killing spree to double the land for slavery were not going to agree to outlaw slavery in the land they just stole by their killing spree  (The Mexican War was essentially a killing spree by US soldiers).

Lincoln did not win that one, either.


Then, Lincoln tried to get slavery out of Washington DC --by offering to pay slave owners for their slaves.  Slave power would have none of this.  they did not want a few dollars, they wanted the slave women, the slave children to sell, the slaves to work to make them far richer than a one time payment.

Lincoln was hated by many for that, too. 

Lincoln got out of politics then, because there was no will even in the North to effectively take on slave power.  There were no riots, no public outcry against spread of slavery by the public --- as long as slavery stayed "Down South"  it was fine with most people in the North.

Lincoln had fought slavery and lost --now he went back home to work as an attorney.

Until David Atchison and Stephen A Douglas passed the Kansas Act.


Lincoln is often derided  now because he kept offering the South no interference in slavery where it was. 

He had no choice.  There was virtually no public support to do anything about slavery where it was.  And no earthly way to raise an army to fight against slavery where it was.

 But Lincoln was well aware what was going on in Kansas and the West -- the killings, the tortures, the thousands of paid men to invade Kansas repeatedly --all happened before Lincoln even ran.

So were most people in the US aware of the same thing. The South was proud of spreading slavery. Those pushing the spread of slavery did very well in public support, like Davis, Atchison, Toombs.

Lincoln concentrated  on avoiding Civil War to spread North and South -- the war the South had already started.  Remember this --South was already at war, their leaders already bragged they were at war,  see Atchison's speech.  

Lincoln did not start anything, he did all he could to stop war.

The South leaders were killing to SPREAD slavery where it was not. Read Lincoln's amazing speeches carefully.

Over, and over, and over, Lincoln shows, as politely as any human could, in respectful terms, how the South was now spreading slavery in a way (Kansas Act and Dred Scott) what would necessarily spread slavery to all of the US, or it would die like a cancer. 

The machinery to spread slavery -- Kansas Act and Dred Scott --was possibly only with the help and design of two men -- David Rice Atchison and Jefferson Davis, with plenty of help from Stephen A Douglas. 

That machinery, that "logic" of Kansas Act and Dred Scott meant that if they could force slavery into Kansas, the citizens of Kansas were 95% against slavery, then there was no way to stop slavery going anywhere, and always. 

We will be all slave, or all free he said.

You need to know the facts I present here, to get it. To get how right Lincoln was, you need to know what Southern leaders were doing, who they were killing, and what they were bragging about.

Lincoln knew. 



Nearly every  history teacher gets this backwards, when you know what Southern leaders were doing and boasting about.

Yes, before Kansas rejected slavery, you heard that South was for States Rights.  That was never accurate, as you will see.   There never was, in the entire  history of the USA, an election, an honest election, to allow or to expand slavery.

Slavery was always spread by violence, under the treachery of men like Davis and Atchison who took over the reigns of power.

But they never had the votes.  They did, in all cases, simply control who could vote, as they did in Kansas until they lost.

Stupidly you may see in text books sentence such as "Missouri wanted slavery". 

Nonsense, Missouri is a state, anyway.  If there were honest elections, and every time there were honest elections, slavery lost. 

Which is precisely why Atchison made sure -- as long as he could -- that Kansas citizens did not have an  honest election. That is the whole reason he passed Kansas Act, then rushed out to Kansas.



If you don't know Southern War Ultimatums, where South leaders bragged about killing to spread slavery (until they lost) you don't know what actually caused the US Civil War.

Because not only were Southern leaders boasting of killing to spread slavery, they were actually killing to spread slavery.

Not kinda. Not sorta. Not in a way.

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

These same men tortured one of John Brown's son until he went insane, killed another of his sons,  and promised to kill Brown himself, the rest of his sons, and his wife.  They had killed, and promised to kill as many as they could -- and they made good on their threats.

The killers in Kansas -- all hired by Atchison -- did not bluff.   They never issued an idle threat.

(Now you get a clue  what Brown was angry about -- Brown fighting back against these men is what changed everything, as you will see.Brown either had to leave, or fight back.

He fought back.  And the person responsible for killers who tortured his son, and killed another, worked for Atchison.

It's not my fault no one told you.

Here, Atchison's own newspaper, the Sovereign Squatter,  December 6, 1856, boasts that those against slavery are the "enemy of God and man".

A  typical rant for Atchison / Stringfellow's newspaper in Kansas.   They will take "gloves off" to anyone who disregards the "constituted authorities"  --meaning Atchison himself.

   Keep in mind, at all times, the vast majority of citizens of Kansas were (and still are) overwhelmingly against slavery.




Meet  David Rice Atchison......the US Senator who boasted he was at war already, in 1856,  for "the entire South"  to spread slavery into Kansas and all of the West.

All the way to, and including, California and Oregon, both were free states by then. He boasted about it, as you will see, and hired over 1000 men from Texas and South Carolina to first push slavery into Kansas Territory
"I will see Kansas in hell before I let it be a free state"  boasted Atchison to cheering crowds -- crowds he hired to invade Kansas.

This is important to know - Atchison was not just "any"  Senator. 

He was the same Senator who, with Stephen A Douglas, passed the Kansas Act. 

Atchison and his men were paid by, Jefferson Davis, officially. 


There are, of course, very good books on this subject --  like these ....(I will do more of a list, later...)




in it's own weird way, Jeff Davis own book verifies the "logic" with which he justified sending the killers to Kansas in the first place.



"Atchison  was not just another guy, not even just another US Senator."

Atchison owned the newspaper "Squatter Sovereign".
Atchison was the US Senator who passed Kansas act with Stephen A Douglas, then rushed to Kansas, and there started a "reign of terror"  that later included torture and killing.

He worked officially for Jeff Davis.

These  paid men bragged-- bragged -- did I mention bragged -- that they were killing to spread slavery, and they will keep killing to spread slavery until slavery is spread to all of the West, including in states and territories that rejected slavery.

All of Atchison's  men -- apparently -- were paid, per his own speech, and paid by Jefferson Davis (or as he said that day "by the present administration".)

As you will see, Atchison even sent Jefferson Davis reports, on the progress of the killings in Kansas.   Davis would later respond in writing that everything Atchison did was "Constitutionally required".

It is fundamental that you know this -- 90 and 95% of the white citizens in Kansas were against slavery there.  Yet Southern leaders -- twice-- issued War Ultimatums that Kansas must accept and respect slavery, no matter what the overwhelming majority of people wanted or voted.

Don't forget that .


This was not only the biggest possible news of that violent decade --it was well reported in the press, and dozens of eye witnesses wrote books about it, went on speaking tours about it.

Southern leaders BRAGGED about it.  





Jeff Davis was very well aware Kansas citizens were overwhelmingly against slavery.

Yet Davis created a "logic"  that Kansas citizens could not reject slavery--  no matter what the public said, no matter what their legislature said, no matter what anyone said.

Slavery --and taking your slaves where you wanted, including to free states--was your "right".

I will show you Davis "logic"  below


Yeah, you are taught that South cared about states rights..... you heard that all your life, right?

Uh, no.

Not according to Jeff Davis --in writing, clear and repeatedly. Kansas, even when Kansas became a free state--must be a slave state.

Oh --those "details" your history teacher "forgot" to mention. 

Keeping slavery out of Kansas -- that was not just wrong.

That was  "intolerable".

It was this logic that Davis used to justify sending Atchison and the killers to Kansas.


South -- or any white person --could take their "property" to Kansas,  and Kansas must not only accept that --Kansas must protect slavery. Kansas, no matter what the percentage wanted no slavery,  did not get to chose.

Because of Dred Scott, Davis wrote.

Slave owners, any white person in all of the country, that wants to take their slave to Kansas, must be protected by the government in Kansas. 

And Davis said that, wrote that, even after --after --Kansas became a free state.

So it was fine --in fact, it was "Constitutionally required"   that Atchison and his men push slavery into Kansas by any means necessary.

Even though 90 and 95% of the public there were against slavery.


Can you guess what right they had to spread slavery against state's rights?

Gee  -- kinda shoots the shit out of the smug teachers who claim the South cared about state's rights. 

 Davis sent killers to Kansas, went to war in 1856, according to Atchison, and 1861 attacked 12 places (not just Fort Sumter)  but was already killing for years in Kansas.

90 and 95% of the public were against slavery?

Too bad.

And that justified sending killers.  It was "INTOLERABLE"  that Kansas citizens try to keep slavery out.

That was intolerable.  Not misguided, not wrong, not unfortunate, not unfair.

That was intolerable.   That justified--according to Davis himself -- everything Atchison did in Kansas.  And justified the Civil War itself, according to Davis writing after the Civil War.


Davis explained  it,  in fact he explained it very well.

We show you his speech and "logic"  below.  The "logic" of why Kansas must accept and respect slavery, even after it was officially a state, and even after Kansas citizens voted 90 and 95% against slavery.

It did not matter what the people or legislature of Kansas voted, according to Davis.  

Read  his official declaration explaining that, in his clever way.

Majority rule -- because 95% of the people in Kansas voted against slavery -- did not matter.

Lot of folks know Davis said that --damn few know now he was justifying his violence in Kansas to stop popular sovereignty and the clear will of the people there.


Charles Sumner gave a two-day speech about Atchison and his killers on killing sprees in Kansas. 

It was a very detailed, hour after hour, for two days, speech.  Reading from newspapers and eyewitness accounts, Sumner detailed the tortures -- the killings --and he detailed how Atchison and his men boasted they were killing and torturing.

Remember, 90 of the citizens in Kansas were against slavery.   The only ones in Kansas FOR slavery were Atchison's paid men. Virtually no other people in Kansas were for slavery -- and none of those were willing to kill to spread slavery.

Atchison made it clear --that  Atchison and Douglas passed Kansas Act, then Atchison rushed off to Kansas to start terrorizing, later torturing and killing.

After the speech, Senator Sumner was beaten nearly to death on the Senate floor. 

 Sumner beaten on floor of the Senate, after his two day speech about Atchison and his men -- their CRIMES AGAINST KANSAS,. 

 Behind Sumner,  feet away, Atchison's partner Stephen A Douglas.  Douglas laughed as Sumner was beaten, according to eyewitnesses to the beating.


Survivors in 1895 met for a reunion.

The third raid into Lawrence,,,,women and children were gunned down, not just men. It was a massacre even of children....

   Why the massacre in Lawrence?  Southern men were livid that Lawrence had disobeyed Atchison earlier.  Lawrence had repeatedly allowed an anti-slavery newspaper to print.

Atchison, by his "bogus legislature" made it illegal to publish anti-slavery newspapers.

If you read his speech, he refers to that.   There is a text version of  his speech.

Atchison's speech was the same week as Sumner's speech -- where he was beaten almost to death.

Remember that, because your teacher has no clue of any of this. That amazing connection -- Atchison boasting of doing the killing and torture the same week Sumner is beaten on floor of Senate going over almost endless details of what Atchison and his men did.



According to Jefferson Davis himself, everything Atchison did -- including hiring 2000 or more men, repeatedly invading Lawrence Kansas,  banning people from even speaking publicly against slavery, and of course their killings and tortures- - were "constitutionally required". 

Who knew that it was constitutionally required to hire men to kill to spread slavery, and boast of it?   

Did you even know any of this? If not, that's not my fault.  It was common knowledge at the time.


Jeff Davis too, later boasted of killing to spread slavery.   More about this below, but take a look -- Davis actually issued an official proclamation that he would invade the North and enslave all blacks there......  He issued this "address" as he called it, to the "People of the Free states"

Bet you had no idea Davis issued an official proclamation bragging he would send soldiers North to enslave free blacks in the free states.

Read it yourself.  He was proud of it. 


When Davis issued this official address,  boasting of spreading slavery North, no one was surprised.


Because  people North and South already knew Southern actions and words re spreading slavery.

It would not be until later that Davis and others, after they lost,  quit boasting about killing to spread slavery and claim they were just about state's rights.

Which is absurd -- Davis was very clear, very detailed, at the time Atchison was killing in Kansas to spread slavery.

Not just Kansas --not just the West, but the same logic that Davis used to justify force to spread slavery there,  he also justified going North and enslaving blacks there.

Davis explained repeatedly that Dred Scott ruled it did not matter what the people in Kansas wanted.  Blacks were "so inferior" they were not human beings (not persons).  They were property.

As for the North, Davis claimed the public safety required he "by force of our arms" enslave black -- IN THE NORTH.





Because Dred Scott decision ruled blacks are not human beings (not persons)  but are "inferior beings"  they are property.

And the SCOTUS ordered (yes, ordered) two things.

1) that blacks be seen not as human beings, but as property.

2)  That the government protect property in all states, including slaves.  

Kansas must not just accept slavery, they must protect it.

In fact the federal government itself was required --per Davis--to protect slavery.  It did not matter one iota if 80 or 90 or 95% of the citizens there voted against slavery.

Even when Kansas became, officially, a free state by 90 and 95% vote,  Davis and Southern leaders issued War Ultimatums that Kansas must accept slavery.

Bet no one told you that, did they?


Southern newspapers, citing Southern leaders,  claimed    that the spread of slavery into Kansas was "The True Issue".

They were proud of that. 

The SPREAD of slavery was the TRUE ISSU



Officially worked for and reported to Jefferson Davis. then Secretary of war.

  Passed the Kansas Act with Stephen A Douglas

  Placed ads in Texas and South Carolina, from which he hired over 1000 men to invade Kansas

 Boasted of things like killing to spread slavery

*  Was the first person known to give a speech about the rebel flag -- which he said was red for the color of blood they would spill to spread slavery



Atchison, as you can read in his own speech,  said it was the "joy" of his life to lead the Southern men he hired, into Kansas to spread slavery by force. 

Here is that link to his speech again....

And they would spread slavery "for the entire South" to the Pacific. 

He was not spreading slavery because the whites in Kansas wanted it --90 and 95% of the white males repeatedly voted against slavery, and eventually became officially a free state just before the start of the Civil War.

The whole point of sending the the over 1000 men to Kanas in the first place was because most people in Kansas were against slavery, and it was well known to everyone.

Atchison was keenly aware that the people of Kansas were against slavery -- that is why he tried at first terror, later torture, and later killing, including paying men from Texas and South Carolina, when he could not find enough men to use violence to spread slavery in Missouri.



To give the citizens of Kansas the "perfect right" to decide slavery themselves, said Atchison and Douglas.

Then Atchison rushed to Kansas, and did exactly the opposite.

As Lincoln (and many others)  said at the time,  the Kansas Act was passed for one reason -- to fool the public into thinking Kansas Act to give citizens of Kansas "the perfect right"  to decide slavery themselves.

Obviously it was the opposite intent, to force slavery into Kansas against state's rights, against popular sovereignty.

Lincoln pointed that out time and time again, long before it became clear to everyone else, when the country learned more about what Atchison was doing.


Atchison had proven Lincoln, and all others, correct on this point.

Atchison personally went to Kansas, immediately after pushing Kansas Act through.  There Atchison hired paid killers, and there started his reign of terror.

At first he did not kill, just terrorized.  He invaded, took over an election with well armed hired thugs, and put cannon in various places to make sure no one came in Kansas, by the ordinary means, unless he approved.

Bet no one told you that.


He would not have done any of this had most people in Kansas been in favor or slavery.

 But it was common knowledge that most white men then in Kansas went there BECAUSE they did not want slavery in Kansas and the West.

Atchison tried his best to get Southern men, and families, to move to Kansas.  That did not work.  So Atchison hired -- paid - men to come to Kansas ready for violence.

It almost worked.   But there were so many anti-slavery men in Kansas, Atchison was about six months late.  But it almost worked.

Atchison also ran out of money, when Jeff Davis was not Secretary of War any more.   Many of them left, when they did not get paid.

Remember this -- the only real support Atchison had was from paid men.   He had drastically inferior numbers unless he hired men who would be violent on command. 

He could not hire enough, long enough.

Don't believe me? See newspapers at the time, and Atchison's own speech.

This one  By those taken prisoner who heard Atchison speech has further details about Atchison speech, where he boasted about killing to spread slavery to his newly hired men.  One of the authors tells how they were kept in prison nearby as Atchison gave his speech about the "red flag"  that Atchison said was red for blood they would spill to spread slavery.

Atchison mentioned those prisoners, and said he did not give a damn if they heard.

Here, again, is Atchison speech



Furthermore,  when other Democrats went to Kansas because they believed Atchison Kansas Act would allow Kansas citizens to "be perfectly free" to decide slavery,   soon saw, in person,  Atchison's violence.  

It's important to know that many folks believed Douglas and Atchison when the sold the Kansas Act in Congress.

They believed it was -- as stated- - to allow Kansas citizens to be "perfectly free"  to accept or reject slavery.  Then Atchison rushed to Kansas himself and personally made sure, with hired men, exactly the opposite.

Importantly, a number of those Democrats -- remember, they went to Kansas believing Atchison about Kansas Act -- not only switched sides, but they helped protect, nominate, and elect Lincoln.

Jay Monaghan did a fine job showing how several leading  Democrats who went to Kansas supporting Atchison  soon found out Atchison was doing exactly the opposite of what Atchison claimed he  would do -- and turned against him.

In fact the first three governors of Kansas -all who believed Atchison at first --saw what was going on and rejected Atchison's treason (which is what it was) and worked against him.

Some of these Democrats (such as US Congressman Jim Lane) seeing Atchison's violence first hand, changed sides, fought Atchison, went back to Illinois, Indiana, and Washington. There he gave speeches to thousands of people about what he saw.  He also spoke on the same stage as Lincoln.

In fact, Kansas Dems who had switched to oppose Atchison invited Lincoln to Kansas! 

Lincoln went to Kansas in 1859,  met with those Democrats (and others) to hear more first hand accounts, although Lincoln already knew of them because of the intense coverage for years that the entire nation was aware of.

Lincoln went to Kansas to meet them. 

These Democrats played  a crucial role in helping Chicago get the site of the GOP convention, and helped Lincoln get the nomination and win the election - on of the most amazing and unreported stories I know.

Without these Democrats, likely Lincoln does not even win the nomination. Many of these men formed Lincoln's guard -- they physically protected Lincoln, a fascinating story.

Technically, when Lincoln went to Kansas,  the laws by Atchison were still in place -- it was still illegal to speak or publish newspapers against slavery.

Lincoln spoke against slavery there anyway -- protected personally by Democrats, and others, like Lane.   

Since most history teachers know nothing, or only a watered down meaningless version of what happened in Kansas,  they sure can't teach it. It's not their fault. 


Democrat Congressmen Jim Lane.

Lane went to Kansas to HELP Atchison because he believed Atchison and Stephen A Douglas claim that Kansas Act would allow the citizens to be "perfectly free" to decide slavery themselves.

Then Lane, and hundreds of others, personally saw Atchison and his men do exactly the opposite. They switched sides-- helped Lincoln get elected, personally protected Lincoln, and changed history.   

Too bad your  history teachers know almost nothing of this. 

Lane became a Republican Senator --and a general in the US CIvil War.

Atchison ran away during the civil war -- back home to TexasThose men who stood up to him risked their lives.  Atchison never did risk his life.  Invariably Atchison would speak, pump up the hate -- then run away for his own safety.

Not uncommon for hate and fear mongers, they rarely risk their lives, they often push others into fighting and dying. 

Remember this -- Atchison was proud of passing the Kansas Act, claiming it would allow Kansas citizens to be "perfectly free" to decide slavery.......then Atchison was proud even more about leading the men into Kansas in repeated acts of terror, and eventually, killing and torture, to stop (yes stop) them from voting and even speaking publicly against slavery.

Let me repeat that --Atchison was proud of it.  He was paid for it, and was awarded with status of being a General of Law and Order, and got the title of General in the Civil War.   But he never got near actual battle -- he rushed of to Texas for his safety.


This Senator was beaten....... remember that.   Your teacher probably mentioned Sumner beating, but rarely do they tell you what he was talking about -for hour after hour, for two days.

He was talking about David Rice Atchison and what his killers were doing in Kansas  after he passed the Kansas Act

You would think teachers would know what Sumner was talking about for two days.   They almost never do -- they almost never know that Sumner told in amazing detail about Atchison passing Kansas Act, then rushing off to kill and torture in Kansas.


It is crucial that you know -- after a two day speech about Atchison -- how Atchison passed Kansas Act with Douglas, how Atchison then rushed to Kansas,  and that Sumner's speech was 100% about that.

Why on earth have questions on the test and bring up Crimes Against Kansas Act, if you don't know this?   The man who passed the Kansas Act, passes the legislation, then goes to Kansas and starts terrorizing, later killing, with hundreds of hired men.

That is what Sumner was talking about!

More important than the beating, of course, was the actual facts Sumner laid out for two days, reading as he did from newspaper accounts and eye witness accounts.

 Sumner gave two days of details, hour after hour, of the killings and tortures -- and how Atchison's men boasted of the killings and tortures.



Atchison gave his speech, to his newly hired men the same week of  Sumner's Crimes Against Kansas Speech.

Atchison was boasting -- boasting -- of doing what Sumner had detailed for two days in the Crimes Against Kansas speech.

He -- Atchison -- did not deny it, he boasted of it.   This was the same man who passed the Kansas Act.  One of the most amazing coincidences in US  history.  And another reason we should know and teach both speeches.


Why the hell didn't your "history" teacher know this?  

Because their textbooks didn't mention it, and they are not (most of them) smart enough to know the details of both men's speeches. 

Sadly, history teachers can be stupid about history,  and ignore almost everything that isn't in their text book.

Blame the text books if you like, but this is not about blame now, it's about what happened then.

And then -- Southern leaders were killing to spread slavery and boasting of it, until they lost.


When Senator Atchison and Jeff Davis spoke about "Southern RIghts"  -- they meant (and said) that was about their right to spread slavery against, yes against, states rights.

See Atchison speech. 

90% of the citizens of Kansas -- or higher percentage -- were against Kansas and voted repeatedly to reject slavery.

Even after -- remember this -- after Kansas citizens repeatedly rejected slavery, even after Kansas became officially a free state, Davis boasted that he was sending troops North to enslave blacks in the North.

See Davis own official documents. 


Over and over, and over,  stupid people quote Davis Orwellian claim that "we just want to be left alone".  

Left alone?  Davis sent Atchison's men to Kansas, paid Atchison, paid the men,  and insisted Kansas nor any place else had a right to reject slavery because of Kansas Act and  Dred Scott decision

It was not "the right to be left alone".   That was nonsense,   repeated by stupid people (even teachers) as gospel, when actually, Davis was earlier bragging of sending the killers to Kansas, where 95% of the white males were against -- against -- slavery.

Davis often said things which were blatantly false, like saying he had tried for 20 years to avoid war.  He had sent the killers to Kansas, he issued the War Ultimatums, he supported years of killing and torture .... before Lincoln even ran for Senate.


Remember, long before Lincoln ran for Senate, long before the Lincoln Douglas debates, long before Lincoln even thought of running for President,  Davis was sending killers to Kansas.  Don't forget that. 


Stupidly, many of our "historians" have let the excuses after the war be what they teach.   Why not teach what Southern leaders actually DID?  Not their excuses later. 

At the time, they proudly, loudly, not only boasted of killing to spread slavery..... they actually did exactly that.  Not sorta that, not kinda. not in a way.

  1. That is what they did. 


US Senator Charles Sumner, beaten almost to death on Senate floor, after his two day speech which detailed Atchison role in passing Kansas Act, then rushing to Kansas, and their killing and torturing -- and boasting of it.

What I am telling you here is what Sumner was talking about in the speech he was beaten for.

I doubt your history teacher has a clue about that.  Maybe they should read the damn speech?

By 1856  Atchison was in Kansas boasting of doing precisely what Sumner had accused him of.   And Atchison's killing sprees were about to become much worse -- not better -- after Sumner accused him of it.

The fact Atchison gave a speech boasting -- in detail -- about doing what Sumner accused him of is so amazing it should be that both speeches by both men are laid side by side, and taught.    Because they were about exactly the same thing.

Southern leaders boasting of killing and torturing in Kansas.

While US Senator Sumner exposes their killings and tortures in Kansas. 

Atchison did not deny what Sumner accused him of -- Atchison BRAGGED he was doing it, and worse, Atchison was bragging to newly hired men, and with those men,









Jeff Davis named Atchison -- officially- as "General of Law and Order in Kansas".

Atchison speech is, in many ways, more important than any other relating to the US Civil War- - certainly more important for the information in it,  than Lincoln's Gettysburg Address, because Atchison is boasting about killing to spread slavery -- and spreading slavery against the will of the citizens of Kansas

In an informal survey of history teachers, I have yet to meet (in person) even ONE history teacher that knows Atchison passed Kansas Act with Stephen A Douglas.

That takes a special kind of stupid.

So, of course virtually no history teacher teaches that Atchison not only pushed Douglas to pass Kansas Act (and bragged about that) --- then more importantly, Atchison personally rushed to Kansas and started his reign of terror, that turned into killing and torture.

And -- he bragged about that, too.  He did not admit it, he bragged about it.  Out the ass brag. 

How the hell have we let this commonly known amazing fact be whitewashed to where not even history teachers can tell you what this man did.

Instead, most "history teachers'  will, if they mention him Atchison at all,  they tell the students Atchison was famous for being President for one day.

No, they don't even have that right.

It's a sorry state of US history text books, and this might be the most sorry part that's missing -- Southern leaders bragging they were killing to spread slavery, until they lost.


Atchison had famously said he would see Kansas in hell before he let it be a free state.  

Atchison claimed that a free state next to a slave state would make "nigger stealers"  out of people in free state. 

So it did not matter to Atchison that 90% of citizens in Kansas were against slavery.

It did not matter than just weeks before, Atchison had claimed Kansas was to allow the people of Kansas the "perfect freedom"  to decide slavery themselves.




Atchison's first act: when he got to Kansas, after passing Kansas Act, was to physically make it impossible for citizens of Kansas to vote against slavery.


Atchison's second act, as you will see, was to create a "bogus legislature"  that made it a crime to speak publically or to publish an anti-slavery newspaper.  



Atchison's two years of killing did not stop when Sumner exposed him on the floor of the Senate --that was the same week Atchison's men arrived from Texas and South Carolina.  

Atchison's speech -- we have the link above, too -- was to those men from Texas and South Carolina.  Here is the link to his speech, again. 

The killings were about to get much much worse, right after the speech, with those new men from Texas and South Carolina.

Remember that. 


Your own history teacher is likely not aware of this narrative -- but it was the narrative -- the goal, the story,  the reality -- of what Southern leaders were doing and bragging about.

It is not our narrative -- it is the one Southern leaders boasted of, till they lost.

Remember this, because it's one of the most amazing periods in all of US history.   The men killing and torturing to spread slavery were boasting of it, promising that, delivering that, and boasting of it, until they lost.

Yet we don't even teach candidly what they did, much less what they bragged about.

Since they were so proud of it, till they lost, shouldn't we at least MENTION what they did, and boasted of?

Without this basic information, you don't know your ass from a banana about basic US history.  It is that fundamental to slavery, the civil war, and to everyone involved in the civil war.

We teach some watered down bullshit about "Trouble in Kansas"  as if it fell out of the sky, as no one did anything, no one killed anyone, no one tortured anyone or issued war ultimatums.  It just "happened' by magic,  we often teach, and there "is plenty of blame".

Plenty of blame my ass. One side just about ran away and let Southern killers and leaders spread slavery -- the other side sent the killers to spread slavery and bragged of it, till they lost.

Yet we actually blame those who dared to fight back. Yes, we do.  Stupidly, history text books and teachers show no difference between the two sides.  

You can only show such bullshit if you omit what Southern leaders did, who they killed, and what they bragged of. 



Of course plenty -- hundreds of thousands (including Lincoln) knew exactly what was going on in Kansas, all this and more. 

Atchison should know -- Jeff Davis should know  --they were doing it, actually doing it, more than any other national leaders.   Yes, Stephen A Douglas passed Kansas Act with him

Yes, Jeff Davis paid him, paid his men, and named him officially "General of Law and Order".

But Atchison is the guy who went to Kansas, hired the killers,  led the killers, and boasted of all of this,  So if you leave that out, you leave out what matters most -- the killings for the "entire South,"   the War Ultimatums of 1856 and 1861, and Jeff Davis own payments to, and defense of,  Atchison and his men.

Yet the whole selling point Atchison used to pass Kansas Act -- with Stephen A Douglas -- that the Kansas Act would give the citizens of Kansas the "perfect right" to decide slavery themselves.


Most high school teachers -- even in Kansas, apparently --could not tell you which US Senator pushed Kansas Act through -- much less what he did next.....  he went to Kansas and started terrorizing, later killing, to spread slavery.

Even though Atchison boasted he had made Douglas work with him to pass Kansas Act,  this is simply not discussed, usually not even mentioned, in high school or college history courses.

If it is mentioned somewhere, the teacher did not get the information from a text book,  we have never found a US text book, high school or college level, that saw fit to mention this. Yet few things in US history are more important than who passed Kansas Act (Atchison) and why (to force slavery there).


Atchison promised to spread slavery to all of the Pacific, including California and Oregon, those two states were already free states. And he almost got the job done.  If it were not for the actions of John Brown, who finally fought back in a way that caused many of Atchison's men to actually leave Kansas, and go back to Texas or South Carolina. 

Atchison had promised the men that citizens of Kansas were cowards, and would not fight back.

He was right, at first.  Then came John Brown. 


Atchison sent reports to Davis on the progress of the killings.


Southern leaders were so proud of this -- Davis actually wrote he explained about spreading slavery into the North "by force of arms" in an official address to people of the North.

How much more clear did  he need to be.  In that document, Davis explained that he wrote the address about spreading slavery North by force of arms,  "so there would be no misunderstanding in the future"  why on earth do our text books not even mention it?

Davis also made it clear elsewhere, in writing.  Davis, in his own book "Rise and Fall of the Confederacy"  that the resistance to the spread of slavery into Kansas was "the intolerable grievance". 

What is so amazing about Davis making it clear that the resistance to slavery in Kansas was "intolerable?    Because Kansas was already a free state -- by the time Davis and SOuthern leaders issued War Ultimatums about it. Remember that, Kansas was already a free state.

Furthermore, for years already, Davis had send killers- - led by Atchison-- to force slavery into Kansas.  The citizens of Kansas repeatedly voted 90 and 95% against slavery.

Davis insisted the will of the people in Kansas, nor their legislature, nor the US Congress, could stop the spread of slavery into Kansas specifically.  He made that very  very clear in documents and his his book, and most importantly, by sending the killers to Kansas in the first place. 

Since Davis and Atchison were both so clear, emphatic and proud (as were other Southern leaders) about killing to spread slavery -- and spread it against state's rights, and even against the rights of the white public to decide slavery -- why on earth is this not taught -- whatsoever -- in our schools?

Killing to spread slavery into Kansas -- and beyond. Southern leaders actually bragged about it, and news of it, blazed across the United States, North and South, at the time. 

To an astonishing extent, we have not taught this in a candid way, and certainly we never taught the many examples of Southern leaders bragging as loudly as they could -- that they were killing, and they were at war -- to SPREAD slavery.

How the hell have we let this  happen? 

The newspaper drawing in 1856 showing the killings and tortures in the back ground, and referring to the Southern leaders forcing slavery not just into Kansas (against states rights, no less) but to other countries. 

This was not the only drawing, and news of the killings, news of the tortures, news of Southern leaders activities,  were the focus of national attention then, and all the way up to and through the Civil War.



Notice anything?   Southern leaders boasted of spreading slavery against -- against -- let me repeat that -- against state's rights. 

And spreading it by violence. By violence means specifically by killing, torture, and terror. Not by debating the merits or nature of slavery,  though Southern leaders said plenty about slavery being "of GOD"  and "pain necessary for their instruction".

No one was trying to convince the people of Kansas and the rest of the West to accept slavery --  there was no efforts other than violence to slavery.

And that was always the case -- slavery, as you will see -- always spread by violence.  This was no exception. 


Southern headlines 1861 .......

Kansas MUST accept slavery. 

Never mind that Kansas was already a free state by this time    

 Let me repeat that, most people just don't get this.  Kansas was a free state by the time Southern leaders issued War Ultimatums that Kansas must accept and respect slavery. 


The 1861 War Ultimatums were no surprise... yet your history teacher never heard of them.
They were no surprise in 1861, because  Southern leaders were already killing in Kansas, and already made it clear Kansas must accept slavery

So the 1861 Ultimatums were nothing new.   South had already sent thousands of men to Kansas  -- and did so proudly, as you can see from their own newspapers at the time.

It would be a shock to everyone, especially in the South, if Davis and Southern leaders suddenly said "That's okay,  Kansas folks don't want slavery, it's all good".



Southern rights, by definition to Southern leaders, meant, and they said so, that they had "equal rights" to have slavery in Kansas or anywhere.

 Dred Scott decision had, according to Davis, made if very clear.... blacks were property, not human beings, and as property, the federal government must PROTECT that property, everywhere, including Kansas Territory, and after Kansas became a free state, he made the exact same demand -- war ultimatum. 

Here Davis explains that in his own book, written after the Civil War.   Very clearly he explains how Dred Scott changed everything, and now the South can not be denied slavery in Kansas, no matter what the popular vote was, and no matter what their legislature said, and no matter what Congress said.

The state of Kansas, though they had voted 95% against slavery, must accept it.  

Davis, of course, never bothered to mention Kansas citizens rejected slavery by 95%, and never bothered to explain how people on SCOTUS can dictate the millions of people in the US and more around the world, are "not human beings".

Nor did Davis every explain why he sent Atchison and paid his 1000, then over 2000 men with US funds (yes, Davis paid Atchison's men with money from the US Treasury).  No one authorized him to do that, he just did it.

So Davis did explain, omitting basic facts,  how he justified the killings and tortures in Kansas. 

The US had resisted "Southern rights"  per Dred Scott court orders by the Congress or by locals to keep slavery out.

It was not just wrong to keep slavery out of Kansas, though 95% of the people there were against it..... it was "intolerable grievance"  and justified all Atchison and his men did.

Link to Davis book.



In 1863,  nine years after Davis sent Atchison to Kansas,  Davis wrote in his official "Address to people of the free states"  the Confederacy would "by force of arms" enslave blacks in the North.

Davis wrote that he explained this in writing-- that he would use force of arms to enslave blacks in the NORTH... 
"so there would be no misunderstanding in the future."



It is hard to see a way Davis or Atchison could make it more clear than they did, because not only were their words clear,  Atchison and Davis were the leaders actually in charge of their hired men.

By omitting all that our text books, and our teachers make it impossible (not just difficult) to understand what was going on.  

Literally no one was surprised at Jeff Davis's very clear official declaration that he would use "force of arms" to enslave in the North.

You may be surprised -- no one was then.

Lincoln of course, knew it well.  Lincoln had said, over and over -- and over, and over -- that the Kansas Act and Dred Scott decision were the "machinery"  shaped by Southern leaders to spread slavery,    and by the operation of that machinery, necessarily, slavery would be spread to all of the United States,  or slavery would end.

By the Kansas Act, and Dred Scott machinery, either the United States ceases to be, or slavery ceases to be.  One of them, in other words, could survive.  Not both.

Kansas -- the killings and tortures in Kansas,  Jeff Davis sending Atchison to Kansas, paying over 2000 men from Texas, South Carolina, and Alabama - and how the South justified this by Kansas Act and Dred Scott decision,  was something Lincoln knew very very well.

Your history teacher's understanding?   Not so much, in most cases.  

It's not their fault. No one explained to them, or even mentioned in text books, Southern War Ultimatums, boasts about killing sprees, and promises to keep killing until slavery was spread to the Pacific.

David Rice Atchison also said he was killing in Kansas "for the entire South". 

Another zinger, to his paid men just arrived- -Atchison said the rebel flag is red in color -- the color of blood they would spill to spread slavery.

Remember this, never forget it.  All this time, all the time South sent men to Kansas, all the time they were killing there, and boasting of it, that Kansas  citizens was at the start, and remained the entire time, profoundly  and overwhelmingly against slavery. 


Most high school history teachers have no clue about these topics. It's no wonder that generations of school children have never once been made aware of Southern leaders paid killing sprees in Kansas, and their boasting of it. 

Here is how the issue is endlessly watered down...

Many from the South, this web site says, "supported slavery"  and "wanted Kansas counted among the states that favored slavery".

You can not possibly get from that that Atchison was the guy who passed Kansas Act, nor that he personally immediately went to Kansas after he passed the Act, and immediately used terror, then later torture and killing, to force slavery there and beyond.

It's not that such history books and web sites tell you lies exactly, it's that you can not -- it's physically impossible -- for you to know who did what from such watered down BS.

Pro slavery forces, the blurb says "wanted Kansas counted as those states who favored slavery"?   Seriously?  

Plus, by omission such drivel does not even mention that 95% of the white males in Kansas were against slavery.  Does not even mention Atchison went there with HIRED men -- hired because almost no one in Kansas had any interest in killing anyone to be for slavery --- Atchison had no choice but to hire men, none, that we know, were even from Kansas.

Yet over and over, when you see things about "Kansas Act"  you get the impression it really was to let people vote on slavery up or down. Oh hell no, that's what Atchison and Douglas SAID -- yes, they said that.

But quite the opposite happened.  WHen people tried to vote against slavery they were terrorized, and some tortured and killed.

And Atchison -- the man who personally passed Kansas Act, boasted of it.  He didn't admit it, he boasted of it.


Ironically, Democrats in Kansas helped Lincoln get nominated, and elected. Many turned officially into Republicans  -- all because they personally saw what Atchison was doing in Kansas.

Democrats like Jim Lane, Congressmen from Indiana,  went to Kansas because he supported Atchison and Douglas Kansas Act and was eager to see an election there.   It was assumed -- and Douglas said this repeatedly -- that Kansas would reject slavery, because it was well known 19/20 people in Kansas were against slavery.


 Lincoln met with Democrats in Kansas,  including former Democrat Jim Lane from Indiana.    Those Democrats went there because they believed Atchison.

These Democrats changed ----to fight Atchison and his men --- after they saw for themselves what Atchison was doing.

Very basic.  This is not complicated.  It was extremely well known at the time.  It is just taught is such watered down nonsense that people today, even history teachers, do not have a clue.

Remember, Atchison and Davis paid killers in Kansas,  long before Lincoln even got there. 

Lincoln went  to Kansas in 1859.

Atchison had been there since 1854.   Atchison had been boasting of killing to spread slavery since 1856.

Atchison and Davis had to pay men to invade Kansas, because there was hardly anyone in Kansas, much less enough of them, to spread slavery there by any vote.  

Atchison rushed to Kansas and hired men precisely because he knew the Kansas citizens were against slavery.

Remember that when you read nonsense about Kansas Act being about "popular sovereignty"   because it was exactly the opposite.  And it was planned that way. 


Southern leaders, for almost five years already, had demanded the spread of slavery into Kansas.

In fact, Southern leaders sent over 2000 killers to Kansas to force the residents there not only to have slavery -- but Southern leaders made it a crime in Kansas to publish anti-slavery newspapers, or to speak publicly against slavery.

Not sorta. Not kinda.  Southern leaders were proud of this as it happened.   They did not hide their demands or their actions.   Why on earth we do not teach what Southern leaders did, and boasted of doing, is an example of the nonsense we fed our children as "history".

Remember, Southern leaders were PROUD of this until they lost.  IF the South had won, they would teach these killers as heroes, as we teach our revolutionary war fighters as heroes.

Instead, we do not even mention these paid killers, sent to Kansas and paid by Jeff Davis, led by US Senator David Rice Atchison, who passed the Kansas Act.


It was very logical for the Confederate leaders stop free speech in Kansas, as they had already in Southern states, regarding slavery.   Slavery could not exist side by side with free speech,  free religion, free newspapers  showing the horrors of slavery.

It was illegal even to preach against slavery in the South, illegal to own books against slavery.  Slave owners did not want to be shamed, jeered at, rejected in public, or called out from the pulpit.   From the 1840's on,  therefore, Slave power made it a crime to publically speak against slavery under the excuse that such speech would "dissatisfy a slave".

That's right -- speaking publicly against slavery, allowing books and sermons and pamphlets against slavery, would "dissatisfy" a slave!   

That's Orwellian double speak, of course, they did not care if slaves were "dissatisfied".   The truth is, they did not want slave owners to be shamed in public.

So they passed the "anti-incendiary" laws.  Atchison and his bogus legislatures quickly passed and tried to enforce those type of laws. 

You may be surprised at Southern War Ultimatums, from 1856 and 1861, but they were logical,and exactly what Southern leaders had demanded-- by violence -- for  years already.


Southern Ultimatums of 1856 and 1861...



Southern war ultimatums were not suggestions.... in fact, in both cases, Southern already started the killings, and they  already boasted of that.

Say what you will about Southern leaders -- they did not issue idle threats. 

These were WAR ULTIMATUMS.  

Jefferson Davis war ultimatums were absurd on their face -- the federal government must -- must -- protect slavery in Kansas,  and that was after Kansas became a free state.  That was after Kansas had voted over 90% against slavery.  And it was AFTER Kansas citizens had fought Jeff Davis's men, led by David Rice Atchison, in Kansas.

Yet Davis and Southern leaders in Montgomery demanded the federal government force Kansas to accept and respect slavery.   That is about as absurd as you can dream up.

No one at the time thought Southern leaders were kidding..... nor were they kidding.... Southern leaders had sent killers to Kansas, and boasted about that, for at least five years.

Just because you don't know that Southern leaders had sent thousands of killers to Kansas 1855 on, does not mean the US public, North and South was not aware.

Let me repeat -- Southern WAR Ultimatums  first point was that Kansas citizens MUST accept slavery.   The federal government, according to Jeff Davis himself,  was bound by the Dred Scott decision to protect slavery -- no matter what the Kansas people voted -- in Kansas.

This was not debatable.  And Davis made this perfectly clear in his own book, just in case you don't understand it.


Intolerable.  Not unfortunate, not a bad choice.  It was intolerable.   Of all the grievances -- this was the worst, one that justified Davis sending Atchison and paid killers to Kansas in the first place.

As Davis said of Atchison and his men in Kansas -- "everything they did was  constitutionally required". 

Davis never cared what the people of Kansas wanted or voted. 

Southern killers were already in Kansas, and already had been in Kansas, for years, though many had gone  home after Davis money to Atchison ran out in 1856.

Remember that there were virtually NO Kansas residents who wanted slavery, and probably no Kansas residents that wanted or sought war to spread slavery there.   The men doing Atchison's biddings were outside men, paid to go to Kansas.  Remember that.

Kansas citizens  rejected slavery repeatedly, overwhelmingly. No one -- not even Davis or Atchison -- pretended otherwise.

You may assume (stupidly, people do) that many people in Kansas must have wanted slavery in Kansas for there to be all the violence in Kansas about it.


In fact Stephen A Douglas repeatedly assured folks that most people in Kansas were against slavery -- 19 out of 20 he said!   And that as very accurate, 19 out of 20 did not want slavery there. 

So when your "history teacher"  says anything about state's rights or popular sovereignty,  and tries to tell you that Southern leaders or Stephen A Douglas, cared about popular sovereignty,  frankly they are stupid about the basic facts

Yet that is often taught in our schools, that South fought for, or cared about, states rights. And that Stephen A Douglas was for popular sovereignty.   

Lincoln and all others who exposed Kansas Act as a vile fraud were of course, exactly right. Not sort of right. Over and over, and over, hundreds of times, in great detail, Lincoln exposed the fraud of Kansas Act.

Yet stupidly we do not teach the basic and obvious facts -- Kansas Act was a vile fraud, deliberately concocted to spread slavery into Kansas by force. 

Lincoln's "House Divided" speech was 100% -- every word -- about the vile fraud of Kansas Act and the next part of the fraud -- Dred Scott decision -- to spread slavery into Kansas and by that logic, if Kansas Act and Dred Scott were not rescinded, would necessarily spread slavery to all of the United States, North as well as South.


Remember that Kansas citizens were always and overwhelmingly against slavery, early on in 1854, in 1856, in 1858, and in 1861.  In fact the percentages were pretty constant -- 10 to 1 against,  even 20 to one against.

Stephen A Douglas admitted several times that "19/20ths" of people in Kansas were against slavery -- but he and Atchison just wanted those folks to have "the perfect right" for them to vote.

Then we knew what happened after Kansas Act passed, Atchison rushes to Kansas and starts to terrorize, later kill, so that Kansas citizens can not reject slavery, unless and until Kansas citizens fought back and won -- which they did. 


Many folks read Davis "majority rule" quote, and have no idea what it means.  They don't grasp that this was Davis logic, too, that it did not matter what the people of Kansas wanted.

Current events (he meant Kansas) nor history show that majority rules.  In other words -- f you Kansas voters.


Davis did not mind others fighting and dying -- he was one of the biggest cowards in US history, and he was not going to fight or die -- others were.  (Atchison too, had a way of pumping up the hired men, then vanishing, and deserted in the Civil War until that was over. ) If you don't believe that, learn about Jeff Davis wife's letter and book which reveal just that....




Davis did not just say this, and things like it, he bragged about it, and even more, Davis sent Atchison to Kansas, officially, and supported his terror, and killings, there. 

Kansas went on -- by defeating Atchison's paid killers --to become a free state.  

 Yet notice something no history teacher you know likely teaches this- - even after Kansas became a free state, Davis and Southern leaders issued war ultimatums that Kansas must accept and respect slavery.

Of course if Davis ever gave a rat's ass about state's rights, he would not have sent Atchison and paid killers to go there in the first place.  And once Kansas citizens were able to defeat Atchison, a sane Jeff Davis would have said "you know, they don't want slavery, let's let it go".

That is not what Davis did.  He kept sending killers to Kansas, and issued War Ultimatums that Kansas must accept slavery,  even after Kansas became a free state.


 There was virtually no "organic" support for slavery in Kansas.  Nor did Davis or Atchison pretend otherwise. Over and over, in every honest election about slavery, Kansas citizens rejected it overwhelmingly, by 90 and 95%.

Certainly there was no local support in Kansas to kill to spread slavery -- the few that voted to accept slavery were not the ones killing to spread slavery there.

Those in Kansas, as you will see, killing to spread slavery were not from Kansas....that excitement was the brainchild, and plan, of a few men, one of them Jefferson Davis, as you will see.

These men were led -- officially, by US Senator David Rice Atchison.

Remember that too. 

Davis official "address to people of the free states"  in 1863

"So there will be no misunderstanding in the future."

We will cover Davis killing sprees in the North later, and his boast about enslaving all blacks in the North, later.  Right now, back to 1856...


 Did you know that Southern leaders sent over 1000 killers to Kansas in 1856,  under the leadership of US Senator David Rice Atchison?

This was huge news at the time, well known, well documented.  A Congressional committee, the Howard Committee, actually travelled to Kansas and took testimony about the killings and tortures by Atchison's men. On this committee was the brother of William T Sherman.

Atchison made it clear -- the Southern attacks, violent attacks in 1856, were not just about Kansas.   It was about slavery into the Pacific.   And even beyond that. 

As a result, Sherman was keenly aware of what the South was doing, who was killing who, and who started the Civil War.  And he knew it started long before 1861.

When you hear that the Civil War was not about Lincoln trying to end slavery -- that's true.  First Lincoln had to stop the bastards from further killing to spread slavery, which was their actions, their war ultimatums, and their pride.

Southern LEADERS -- like Atchison -- said it was their pride- "the most joyous day"  he told his men, was the day they would invade Lawrence Kansas and kill anyone who got in the way.   Atchison hired the men to come to Kansas because almost all men in Kansas were against slavery, and Atchison knew it.

In their grandiose amazing speeches, where crowds cheered, Southern leaders told the audiences that they were spreading slavery for GOD and white survival. 

They would spread slavery --- the very special kind of Southern slavery of punishment to black race for biblical sins - to the entire white world.

Remember, these were not the nuts -- these were the very top Southern leaders, including Jeff Davis, Alexander Stephens, and David Rice Atchison.

And at the time, they were not coy, or timid, or ashamed of killing to spread slavery by force.  It was their duty to man, to the white man, and to GOD.

They bragged of this over and over. In context, at length.

More, they did what they bragged about.  They did not just say they were invading and killing and torturing -- they did that.

We do not teach this as fundamental to the Civil War.  If we mention it at all in our text books, its as if this kind of pumping up fear and religious extremism was interesting but rare.

Nothing was more important than the actions and boasting by Southern leaders. 

We should therefore teach what they did, and what they bragged about, until they lost.


 Senator Atchison helped that documentation by boasting (out the ass, repeatedly)  that he was in Kansas to spread slavery.

Atchison was blunt -- but so were others.   Jeff Davis was blunt at times, including his official address to people of the "free states"  as he called them.

Davis insisted Kansas could not keep slavery out -- no matter what the vote -- because of the Dred Scott decision.  He made this very clear in his speeches and his own book.

The resistance to slavery into Kansas was "intolerable"  Davis said.  Davis already had Atchison in Kansas killing and terrorizing before Dred Scott decision, but "details" like that never bothered the man much.

Yes, Jeff Davis was well aware, and never said otherwise, that the overwhelming percentage of citizens in Kansas were against slavery.

Davis did not speak about state's rights during this time -- though he did before and much later.  State's rights was always an excuse.

In fact, at no time did any slave state have an honest election about slavery.    At Hinton Helper said,  if they had allowed an honest vote about slavery,  even the South would reject it. 

Slavery was very much a violent enterprise imposed  by men in concert to do so.  Nothing shows that more clearly than Kansas, where Davis paid for Atchison's killers, and repeatedly sent killers to Kansas for force slavery there.

It is bizarre myth -- repeated almost endlessly now -- that Southern leaders had a concern for state's rights.  Regarding slavery, the top leaders actually killed to STOP states rights.  And they bragged about it, until they lost. 

Remember this -- don't buy into the meme that South cared about state's rights.  Nonsense.  As you will see, Southern leaders killed to STOP states rights, and boasted about it.  But more than boasting, they actually sent killers, and paid the killers to force slavery into Kansas, and beyond. 

Davis was well aware Kansas citizens were against slavery.... that is why he sent killers there.


"perfect right"

Atchison and Stephen A Douglas had passed Kansas Act in 1854,  supposedly so the citizens there could decide slavery for themselves.   What could be more honest than that.

But Atchison, immediately after passing Kansas Act, shows up in Kansas with hired men and arms to stop people in Kansas from voting against slavery.  In fact, Atchison quickly created, by paid and  armed hired men, a "bogus legislature".

The bogus legislature (made up of Atchison's men)  makes it a crime to publish anti-slavery newspapers.

Atchison takes arms from federal supplies, lines cannon on the main entry ways into Kansas, and for as long as he could stops anyone from entering Kansas that won't sign a pledge to support slavery.

Kansas folks simply created several more paths into Kansas, so Atchison's cannons and road blocks was not as effective as he and hoped.

So much for that "perfect right" to be free to decide slavery themselves.  Never forget -- Atchison and Stephen A Douglas sold the Kansas Act as the remedy for "slavery question"   by giving folks in Kansas "the perfect right" to choose  slavery or not by voting.

Then --as you will see -- after Atchison passed Kansas Act, he personally rushes to Kansas, and there makes sure people in Kansas have no rights at all to rejected slavery.  Not only no right to vote against it, but no right to enter the state if he can help it, and no right to speak against slavery.


By 1856,  Atchison  had already been in Kansas since 1854, and boasting of spreading slavery in Kansas.  Atchison said he "would see Kansas in hell" before he let it become a free state.


Kansas citizen had already voted against slavery by a 90 and 95% vote --  Stephen Douglas responded that did not matter, they did not have enough population  yet.                  

But Kansas would grow -- despite Atchison's cannons at strategic points, and the white males would vote that was again and again, against slavery, always by the overwhelming ratios of 10 and 20 to 1. 

There simply was very little local support for slavery. Indeed, almost every killer Atchison hired, were from elsewhere. Some were from Missouri, but the bulk were from Texas, Alabama, and South Carolina.

If Atchison had more money or men, he likely would have succeeded.  

Atchison and his hired killers failed, so Kansas eventually becoming a free state in 1861, despite Atchison's violence.

Atchison's amazing speech in 1856 (see below) was to his newly hired men from Texas, Alabama, and South Carolina.  The 1856 speech and invasion was  the first of three invasions of Lawrence Kansas, the last invasion, during what we call the "Civil War"  was horrific --the attackers killed women and children, and burned the entire city to the ground.

It's important to notice --your history teacher probably won't know or mention it -- Southern leaders boasted about it.  Officially, clearly, repeatedly,  Southern leaders did boast about killing to spread slavery --- not just into Kansas, but into all of the West, and even (in case of Jeff Davis) into the North.

Yes, into the NORTH.

 They boasted as loudly and proudly as they knew how, until they lost.
  things would get much, much worse, instantly.  Atchison speech was to the new hires from Texas, South Carolina and Alabama -- wherein Atchison made them promise to kill,  told them in grandiouse terms that they were killing to spread slavery,   and they were spreading slavery "for the entire South".

Atchison even explained -- bragged -- that their flag was red in color for the color of blood they would spill to spread slavery.

Atchison's speech was as stunning as Sumners -- but only stunning if you are stupid about what was going on in Kansas, only if you did not know that factually this is what was going on.   Killings and tortures by a US Senator sent to Kansas, the same Senator that passed the Kansas Act.

Remember, Atchison and DOuglas had sold Kansas Act on the "violent fraud"   that they passed Kansas Act to let the citizens of Kansas be "perfectly free"  to decide slavery themselves.

Instead -- as many any suspected because they knew the South, they knew Stephen A Douglas, and they knew Atchison -- that KS Act was the set up to instead force slavery into Kansas by violence.

Sumner listed, in great detail, the killings and tortures by Atchison's men in Kansas.



Amazingly, we give Jeff Davis personal excuse for Sumners beating, as fact.   See the US Senate's explanation in their own web site to this day, of the beating of Charles Sumner beating.

Senate misleading page about Crimes Against Kansas

Not one candid word (seriously, not one word) of the topic of Sumner's speech -- the killings and tortures by Atchison and his men, the paid men.

  No mention whatsoever of Atchison, so no mention that he (Atchison) was in Kansas that very moment killing and torturing.

No mention that Atchison and Douglas had sold Kansas Act as the remedy -- "perfect freedom" for the people of Kansas citizens to decide slavery themselves, then Atchison raced to Kansas and started his reign of terror there, that was, by the time Sumner gave his speech, long past the point of terror-- but now the killings and tortures,  which were about to get much worse.

Yet Atchison and his men were the entire subject of  Sumners speech, how Atchison and Stephen A Douglas had passed Kansas Act, then Atchison went to Kansas and there boasted of killing to spread slavery. 

No mention that Douglas told Sumner just before this that he should be "beat like a dog".

No mention that Douglas stood by laughing as Sumner was beaten.

See the US Senate's page of Atchison.  Not one word of his speech, the same week of Sumners, in Kansas boasting to his men about killing to spread slavery there.

See the problem yet?  



Survivors, witnesses,  and  even widows of those killed actually come back from Kansas and told these stories of torture and killing -- by Atchison's men.   

Great crowds gathered to hear stories of Atchison's men killing and torturing.

So Sumner's speech was just one of many public announcements of Atchison's killing sprees.   Lincoln gave several famous speeches at this time, about what was going on in Kansas.  In fact, Lincoln went to Kansas and met the people involved, as we cover elsewhere. 

Yet we hardly teach whatsoever what Sumner's speech was about -- it was about Atchison passing Kansas Act, then rushing to Kansas and starting his reign of terror there. 

The excuse the beating was that Sumner insulted someone's wife. That's not true.  If you want to twist Sumners words to justify the beating - you can -- but only if you ignore the actions of what went on in Kansas. 

Stephen A Douglas had already told SUmner he should be beaten "like a dog"  before he gave the speech,   yet that too is virtually unreported today.  

In fact, you won't find any text book publishers that bothers to mention (because they were not  told) that  Sumner had been speaking of Atchison by name, that Atchison was the one who passed Kansas Act.  

The main thing Sumner impressed upon the Senate in that speech, other than the past killings and tortures -- were that the killings were still going on.  This was not a history lesson, but a report on current events.

You would think that every high school and college text book would not only point this out, the facts themselves,  and  show both speeches.

Almost no "major" historian even bothered to notice. or write clearly,  that the Senator who passed Kansas Act then rushed to Kansas to kill and terrorize to spread slavery.    Yet the Crimes Against Kansas Act was about that very thing.

Only one historian (that we found) bothered to mention that Atchison gave his speech about killing and invading Lawrence, the same week Sumner spoke for two days about Atchison and his men in Kansas.

How on earth does that happen?



Atchison and Stephen Douglas....

Atchison and Stephen A Douglas passed the Kansas Act,  a fact everyone at the time knew, and that Sumner explained in his speech.  Atchison boasted he had forced Douglas to help him push Kansas Act through.

Guess who told Sumner he should "be beaten like a dog" before he was beaten like a dog?  Stephen A Douglas told that to Sumner.

Guess who stood by, laughing, as elderly Sumner was beaten with a cane repeatedly, breaking his skull?

Stephen A Douglas stood by laughing, as reported in newspapers at the time.

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

And Atchison boasted of it....


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

It's a near certainty that your history teacher -- be they a PhD or a BA,  do not know either of those basic facts. If they know, it's only because they found it outside US text books, outside the normal places to learn history of that period.   

 Not all authors are stupid about who killed who, and why, in Kansas

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


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. 

The more you find out about the killings and tortures at the time -- if anything, Lincoln saved  his most clear discussion of the killings in Kansas for personal letters and conversations.

The "state's right" excuse  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





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 ....

It does tell you --"pro slavery forces"  defrauded Kansas first election.  Not false, but just not specific -- what does "defraud" mean?

Atchison came in with over 800 paid killers, and promised over 5000 if needed.   They simply took over voting places, voted dozens of times each, and dared anyone to a thing about it.  In a place where 90% of the people were against slavery, they insisted 80% voted for slavery.

Virtually no one actually voted for slavery ever, in any honest election in Kansas -- or elsewhere. This was the pattern of other elections too, fraud and violence by slave power.

Let's see what they "forget" in the above -- and in almost every "history book" of similar vagueness. 

5000 Ruffians?  They did mention 5000 "ruffians"  as if these guys were just tough looking.

And they act like they material out of no where.  Not one word that they were paid.. Thousands of paid men, hired by Atchison,  coming not from Kansas but from Texas, Alabama, and South Carolina.

Not one word. 

Not one word that Jefferson Davis paid them.

Not one word. 

You can't -- the best scholars in the world can not -- deduce from what we get in the watered down BS, who did what.  .

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

Not one word that he boasted to them the rebel flag was red for blood they would spill to spread slavery.

Not one word of the hundreds, eventually thousands, of tortures killings, and act of terror committed by the "ruffians"/.

  If you want to know who did what, most history textbooks just do not give you that very basic information.

Not one word that Atchison personally got Kansas Act passed, then rushed to Kansas to terrorize, later kill and destroy.  That should have been page one, sentence one. 

Not one word that Atchison BOASTED he was there with the men to kill to spread slavery.  What Atchison boasted of doing is important -- because he was doing what he boasted of. 

You would literally be dumber after you read this by history channel, than before you read it.They do not even  mention David Rice Atchison.

And invariably, they make it seem like John Brown was the bad guy.  A goofy "extremist" who for reasons they never mention, suddenly started killing.


By that time,  May of 1856, Atchison men had killed one 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.  Remember that. Not until Atchison killed his son. Not until they tortured the other.  Not until they tortured and killed others. Not until they showed up with over 1000 men from Texas, South Carolina and Alabama.  Not until they bragged about killing to spread slavery to the Pacific.

See --John Brown knew all that.  From history channel, you can not have  a clue. 

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. Instead of supporting Reeder, Davis supporters charged Reeder with Treason.  Davis could not, after 1858, arrest his former governor for treason, since Davis lost his post as Secretary of War.

Davis also lost his ability to pay Atchison and Atchison's men. 

   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.


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.


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.

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.



 I seriously want to know.  

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


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.

WTF guys?  How did you miss this?  They did not miss it. 

They whitewashed it. 

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. 

For example McPherson, as far as I can tell, mentioned Southern War Ultimatums a total of once.   Once.  He never explained or showed them, never explained or showed the importance of them, or what went on to bring them to pass, and what happened because of them.

Just one mention .  That's the total, the sum total, of McPherson and Southern War Ultimatums.

One mention.  

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?

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


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 may 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.   


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.



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 

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 apparently point out what Davis DID.

Unless someone tells the students this -- that Davis sent killers to Kansas,  sent Atchison to Kansas, go reports from Atchison about the killing,  backed up everything Atchison did, and that Atchison boasted about killing to spread slavery,   the students won't get that from Davis.

Of course they won't know that 90 and 95% of citizens there were against slavery -- yet, per Davis,  they "must accept and respect slavery"  because of Dred Scott .



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



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.


No comments:

Post a Comment