American History Homework Five Answers - Student Three

Addison DM

1.Letter “b.” As a member of the Know Nothing, or American Party, such a Mr. Biden would most likely oppose immigration.

Correct.

2.The Whigs were opposed to the Mexican War and annexation of Texas, and they were more generally opposed to slavery.

Superb! Will use as a model answer.

3.The single event that caused the Mexican War was President Polk’s positioning of troops along the Texas-Mexico border, which induced the Mexicans to fire on the Americans, and thus begin a war. There was, however, a lot of conflict between Mexico and the United States regarding Texas and its annexation before Polk’s move. The war was ended by US’s capture of Mexico City and the signing and ratification of the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo, the greatest effect of which was to grant a large portion of Mexican land to the United States.

Excellent.

4.Several people did important and significant things in this period, so it’s hard to tell who was the most important person. Perhaps it was Abe Lincoln. This is because even though he was not a strict abolitionist, he did have a strong moral sense of the wrong of slavery, and he was able to capture people’s attention and transmit his ideas with his great speaking skills. Or, it might be Franklin Pierce, because he signed the Kansas-Nebraska Act which contributed strongly to the Civil War.

But Lincoln didn't really do much until he was president, which was 1861. He was not much of a leader from 1840-1860, which is the period the question asks. Lincoln lost in 1858 and although he won the presidency in 1860, he did not campaign much. (Minus 1).

5.“Bleeding Kansas” was the term used to denote the situation in Kansas before the Civil War. This was that, partly due to the “popular sovereignty” idea, towns and municipalities in Kansas fell to fighting each other, so that there were mini civil wars going on all throughout Kansas.

Excellent, but the "This was that" is awkward phraseology.

6.Steve, the little guy getting spanked, represents Stephen Douglas, who, as the lady suggests, supported and pushed for the Kansas-Nebraska Act. The lady represents America. The cartoon tries to show that the Kansas-Nebraska Act was harmful for the country. It was probably written by a Republican, or anyone else who was leaning towards the anti-slavery position.

Superb, except it could have been written by a southern who disliked Douglas also. But you're probably right that it was written by a (northern) Republican.

7.Because there were so many events, both large and small, that contributed both directly and indirectly to the Civil War, it is very hard to tell if the Civil War could have been avoided, and if so, how. But let’s say the Kansas-Nebraska Act really was the greatest cause of the Civil War, and let’s imagine it was never enacted. Then, it could be that free states would have remained free, and slave states would, as slavery went out of fashion in general, slowly move to a different kind of economy.

Could be. Excellent answer.

Honors Questions

1.Debate question- Is it ever justified for a president to lie to Congress to accomplish a goal sought by Americans? If you’re going to go by biblical morality, which allows no compromising with sin, then lying is never justified at all. Some stretching of the truth could be allowed in cases of national security, but when dealing with an idea that is merely popular at the time, there is little or no justification, much less any sort of obligation, to ever lie, or even stretch the truth.

To what are you citing in the Bible? The Ten Commandments speaks in terms of "bearing false witness," which is a narrow type of lying. I like your answer but don't think you've really demonstrated any conflict with the Bible.

3.Senator Douglas’ “Freeport Doctrine” was based on popular sovereignty, and suggested that municipalities could override the “right” to own slaves if popular vote put in place laws making their ownership impossible in a practical sense. The reason this cost Senator Douglas the election was that it was a politically middle-of-the-road concept, and he ended up losing the support of everyone who had strong opinions on both sides.

But why did Douglas lose the pro-slavery support? You could explain a bit better, as in observing that a mere popular vote could deprive the slaveowner of his "property" in slaves. (Minus 1).

4.Morally, John Brown did little for the abolitionist cause. His actions in the Pottawatomie Massacre were not done in self-defense or in defense of slaves, but rather in revenge. But in the practical sense, he may have accomplished a lot with his Massacre, because it showed the other side that there would be retaliation. The disclaimer, of course, is that by the very act of retaliation, he didn’t settle scores, but promoted and increased the back and forth violence that became known as “Bleeding Kansas.”

Good point about Brown acting (unjustifiably) with a motivation of revenge.

Terrific answers. Score: 98/100.--Aschlafly 19:18, 16 October 2008 (EDT)