Slaves preparing the ground to plant cotton ona southern plantain In the year 1810 there were 7.2 million people in the United States. For 1.2 million of these people the words of the Declaration of Independence “that all men are ereated equal” were far from true. They were black and they were slaves. ‘Thomas Jefferson, who wrote the Declaration of Independence, owned slaves himself. So did George Washington and other leaders of the movement for American independence and freedom, Both Jefferson and Washington had uneasy consciences about this. But other big landowners in southern states such as Virginia defended slavery. They asked what they thought was an unanswerable question. How could they cultivate their fields of tobacco, rice and cotton without slave workers? In the north of the United Seates farms were smaller and the climate was cooler. Farmers there did not, ced slaves to work the land for them. Som northerners opposed slavery for moral and religions reasons also. Many were abolitionists that is, people who wanted to end or abolish slavery by law. By the carly nineteenth century many northern states had passed laws abolishing slavery inside their own boundaries. In 1808 they also persuaded Congress to make it illegal for ships to bring any new slaves from Africa into the United States. By the 1820s southern and northern politicians were arguing fiercely about whether slavery should be permitted in the new territories that were then being settled in the West. The argument centered on theMissouri territory, which was part of the Louisiana Purchase. Southerners argued that slave labor should beallowed in Missouri and all the other lands that formed part of the Lonisiana Purchase. Both abolitionists and other northerners objected strongly to this. Northern farmers moving west did not want to find themselves competing for land against southerners who had slaves to do their work for them. Eventually the two sides agreed ona compromise. Slavery would be permitted in the Missouri and Arkansas territories but banned in lands to the west and north of Missouri. ‘The Missouri Compromise, as it was called, did not end the disputes berween North and South. By the carly 1830s another angry argument was going on. This time the argument began over import duties. Northern states favored such duties because they protected their young industries against the competition of foreign manufactured goods. Southern states opposed them because southerners: relied upon foreign manufacturers for both necessities and luxuries of many kinds. Import duties would raise the prices of such goods. During the argument abont import duties a southern political leader named John G. Calhoun raised a ‘much more serious question. He claimed thata state had the right to disobey any federal law ifthe state believed that the law would harm its interests. This Hiestsimeon a coon planation bese she Misisipph River. idea was strongly supported by other southerners. It became known as the “states” rights doctrine. Calhoun's claim was strongly denied by Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts. The power to decide whether the federal authorities were acting rightly or wrongly belonged to the Supreme Court, said Webster, not to individual states. Ifstates were given the right to disobey the federal government, he said, it would become “a mere rope of sand” and lose its power to hold the country together. Webster’s speech was a warning to Americans that the states” rights doctrine could become serious threat fo the unity of the United States Tn the next twenty years the United States grew much bigger. In 1846 it divided the Oregon Territory with Britain, In 1848 it took vast areas of the Southwest from Mexico. Obtaining these new lands raised again the question that the Missouri ‘Compromise of 1820 had tried to settle—shonld. slavery be allowed on new American territory? Once again southerners answered “yes.” And once again northemers said “‘no.”” In 1850 Congress voted in favor of another ‘compromise. California was admitted to the United States as a free state, while people who lived in Utah and New Mexico were given the right to decide for themselves whether or not to allow slavery.‘To persuade southerners to agree to these arrangements, Congress passed a new Fugitive Slave ‘Act. This was a law to make it easier for southerners to recapture slaves who escaped from their masters and fled for safety to free states. The law called for “severe penalties on anyone assisting Negroes to’ escape from bondage. Slave owners had long offered rewards, or “bounties,” for the return of runaway slaves. This had created a group of men called “bounty hunters,” ‘These men made their living by hunting down fugitive slaves in order to collect the rewards on them. With the snpport of the new law, bounty hunters now began searching free states for escaped slaves. ‘The Fugitive Slave Act angered many northerners who had not so far given much thought to the rights, and wrongs of slavery. Some northern judges refiased to enforce it. Other people provided food, money, and hiding places for fugitives. They mapped out escape routes and moved runaway slaves by night from one secret hiding place to another. The final stop on these escape routes was Canada, where fugitives could be followed by neither American laws nor bounty hunters, Because railroads were the most modern form of transport at this time, this carefully organized system was called the “Underground Railroad.” People providing money to pay for it were called “stockholders.”” Guides who led the fugitives to freedom were called “conductors,” and hiding places were called “depots.” Alll these were terms that were used on ordinary railroads. Many conductors on the Underground Railroad were former slaves themselves. Often they traveled deep into slave states to make contact with runaways. This was a dangerous thing to do. IFconductors were captured they could end up as slaves again or dead. As the number of fugitive slaves increased, gunfights between bounty hunters and conductors became more and more common. In 1854 a Senator named Stephen Douglas persuaded Congress to end the Missouri Compromise. West of Missouri, on land that was supposed to be closed to sliyery, was a western territory called Kansas. In 1854 Congress voted to let its people decide for themselves whether to permit slavery the William Lloyd Garrison and the abolitionists Some Americans opposed to slavery were prepared to wait for it to come to an end gradually and by agreement with the slave owners. Others wanted to end it immediately and without compromises ‘The best known spokesman of the people in this, second group was a Boston writer named William Lloyd Garrison ‘On January 1, 1831, Garrison produced the first issue of The Liberator, a newspaper dedicated to the abolition of slavery. “On this subject I do not wish to think, or speak, or write with moder- ation,” he wrote, “I will not retreat a single inch— and I will be heard.” Garrison meant what he said. He became well- Known for the extreme way in which he expressed his views. He printed, and sometimes invented, sensational stories about how cruelly black slaves were treated, He attacked slave owners as evil monsters, about whom nothing good could be said. Sometimes Garrison went too far even for his fellow northerners, In 1835 an angry mob showed its dislike of his opinions by parading him through the streets of Boston with a rope around his neck. But Garrison refused to be silenced. His blood- thirsty calls for action and sensational stories continued to offend both the supporters of slavery and those who wanted to bring it to an end peace- fully, Buc they convinced many other people that slavery. was evil and that it must be abolished at ‘once—even if the only way to do this was by war. A race began to win control of Kansas. Pro-slavery immigrants poured in from the South and anti- slavery immigrants from the North. Each group was dezcrmined to outnumber the other. Soon fighting and killing began. Pro-slavery raiders from Missouri burned a town called Lawrence and killed some of its people. In reply, a half-mad abolitionist named John Brown led a raid in which a number of supporters of slavery were killed. Because of all the fighting and killing in the territory Americans everywhere began referring to it as “bleeding Kansas.