American History Homework Five Answers - Student Two

Steve M. is kinda late

1\. B - He would not have welcomed immigrants if he was a know-nothing.

Correct.

2.They wanted a national bank and they did not want to annex Texas. Basically everything the Democrats were against, the Whigs wanted.

Superb! Good for the model answers!

3\. Before the Mexican War, there was a lot of territory Mexico owned where American settlers lived. These settlers broke off and started their own country: the Republic of Texas. Why Mexico didn't just re-conquer that nation doesn't make sense to me. Instead, they waited until the Republic of Texas was a state, this way they would have to fight the entire United States, rather than a smaller, newer country. Also, they threatened to declare war as soon as Texas was ratified in the U.S., but then didn't; Polk had to do it for them, and use some dishonesty too. It seems that Mexico had as hard a time making up it's mind as the United States did.

The war ended as the U.S. Marines marched through "the Halls of Montezuma," and the Guadalupe-Hidalgo treaty gave America over half of what was then Mexico.

Excellent answer, with a superb reference to the song!

4\. James K Polk acquired much more land for the United States. He worked hard and had the greatest impact of anyone between 1840 and 1860.

Terrific.

5\. After the idea of Popular Sovereignty replaced the mandates of the Missouri Compromise, each state had to decide for itself whether or not slavery was right. Bleeding Kansas referred to the conflict that erupted over slave's rights in Kansas.

Right.

6\. Columbia, the lady representing America, is talking about the Kansas-Nebraska Act. Stephen Douglas strongly supported this act because it introduced the concept of Popular Sovereignty. The cartoonist was a republican who believed the Douglas was wrong.

Excellent.

7\. The Civil War was almost certainly inevitable. The only way I can see it not happening is if all the plantation owners got saved, decided slavery was wrong, and set them all free of their own accord. Even if this happened, the production of the South would go, well, south, which it did, after the slaves were freed. America needed slaves to grow as strong as it did.

I thought it was a great idea to have a Missouri Compromise: All the states made above this line are Free, all the states made below this line are slave. The Kansas-Nebraska Act looked fine to, on paper. Let each state decide for itself, a nice federalist concept. But I think this is one of the few situations where the National Government needed to make one decision. So the Missouri Compromise was good and might have kept the county together for a long time. But people don't like slavery in the "Land of the Free." Eventually, slavery would have to be abolished, and there is no easy way to do that.

I'm glad the War happened. If it were not for Stephen Douglas and the Kansas-Nebraska Act, the war would have been years later. The Missouri compromise could not have lasted forever, maybe about the time mustard gas comes into use, that would be the time for a Civil War.

Excellent analysis!

H2. The Compromise of 1850 allowed the slave owners to bring their slaves with them when they traveled west, slavery expanded to the southwestern states. :-( It also gave the republican party the state of California. :-) But it tightened slave laws: now slaves who ran away to the north could be caught and brought back. :-( It stopped the slave trade in D.C., :-) but slavery in the city was allowed to continue. :-( As usual in a good compromise, everybody loses.

Superb answer! Creative use of the faces!

H3. Lincoln was clever. He made Douglas define his ideas, including Popular Sovereignty. Douglas had to specify that if a state voted to abolish slavery, they could abolish it, even a slave state. At that point the slave holders began to think that the Missouri Compromise was not such a bad idea after all. At least with that, they were guaranteed to be able to own slaves below the 34 30' line. With the Freeport Doctrine there was no sure thing, every state was different.

Excellent, good for the model answers. By the way, the line was 36 30'.

H5. the Dred Scott decision set a precedent. Basically, the court said people with dark skin have no rights. After Roe v. Wade, abortion was protected, and it became common. In both of these Supreme court decisions, the court arbitrarily decided that some people just don't have any say in their future. Blacks were treated like dirt before Dred Scott, but now the government had decided that these men are only worth what you pay for them. Meaning if you don't treat your slave like property, well, you might be asked "do are you that kind to your favorite hammer or bucket? They're just property." Similarly, babies were said to have no rights. They are the property of the mother, she makes the decision.

Superb answer, which also should be in the model answers, but I'm going to see what others say first before making that decision.

Fantastic answers. Score: 100/100. Perfect!