DOCSLIB.ORG

The Kansas Nebraska Act Excerpts

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Kansas Nebraska Act Excerpts The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 Homework: Read the excerpted text of the Kansas-Nebraska Act below and answer the questions that follow. The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 Excerpts from the Kansas-Nebraska Act, May 30, 1854: http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?doc=28&page=transcript An Act to Organize the Territories of Nebraska and Kansas. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SEC. 1. And be it further enacted, [OUTLINES THE GEOGRAPHICAL BOUNDARIES OF THE NEBRASKA TERRITORY] SEC. 10. And be it further enacted, that the provisions of the act entitled “An act respecting fugitives from justice, and persons escaping from, the service of their masters,” approved February 12th, 1793 … [are] in full force within the limits of the said Territory of Nebraska. SEC. 14. And be it further enacted, That … all Laws of the United States … shall have the same force and effect within the … Territory of Nebraska as elsewhere within the United States, except the eighth section … the admission of Missouri into the Union …being inconsistent with … non-intervention by Congress [national government] with slaves in the States and Territories, as recognized by the legislation of 1850… is … declared … void; … the true intent … of this act not to legislate [decide about] slavery into any Territory or State, nor to exclude it … but to leave the people [of Nebraska] perfectly free to [decide]… their own way… SEC. 19. And be it further enacted, [OUTLINES THE GEOGRAPHICAL BOUNDARIES OF THE KANSAS TERRITORY] SEC. 28. And be it further enacted, that the provisions of the act entitled “An act respecting fugitives from justice, and persons escaping from, the service of their masters,” approved February 12th, 1793 … [are] in full force within the limits of the said Territory of Kansas. SEC. 32. And be it further enacted, That … all Laws of the United States … shall have the same force and effect within the … Territory of Kansas as elsewhere within the United States, except the eighth section … the admission of Missouri into the Union …being inconsistent with … non-intervention by Congress [national government] with slaves in the States and Territories, as recognized by the legislation of 1850… is … declared … void; … the true intent … of this act not to legislate [decide about] slavery into any Territory or State, nor to exclude it … but to leave the people [of Kansas] perfectly free to [decide]… their own way… Question Answer Sections 1 and 19 of the 1854 Act organize the territories of Kansas and Nebraska. Do you remember how were they originally acquired by the United States? How do Sections 14 and 32 repeal [cancel] the Missouri Compromise of 1820? What reason do Sections 14 and 32 give for repealing the Missouri Compromise of 1820? We will study a federal law regarding fugitive [escaped] slaves, which was first enacted in 1793, but was strengthened in 1850 [as we will learn in the notes for this lesson]. What do you think this law states about escaped slaves? The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 Popular Sovereignty to decide slave issue??? Annotation “It will triumph & impart peace to the country & stability to the Union." So predicted Illinois Senator Stephen A. Douglas regarding the policy of local "popular sovereignty." Popular sovereignty allowed the settlers of a federal territory to decide the slavery question without interference (congressional non-intervention) from Congress. Stephen Douglas included this policy in a bill organizing the northern section of the Louisiana Purchase once known as the Nebraska Territory but now divided into two separate territories called Kansas and Nebraska. By removing the question of slavery's expansion from federal lawmakers, and placing it before the settlers immediately affected by it, Douglas thought he could preserve the American union by avoiding a federal dispute between northern abolitionists and southern "ultras." Though Douglas believed the settlers of a territory should decide the slavery question without input from the rest of the nation, his Illinois rival Abraham Lincoln begged to differ. He thought it only logical that the federal territories be regulated by the federal government, meaning Congress. A third view, proposed by Southern senators, argued that precisely because federal territory was owned by the nation as a whole, American citizens possessed the right to take their property—including slaves—into the territory. Stephen Douglas argued that popular sovereignty was neither a new nor controversial approach to organizing federal territories, but one rooted in American self-government and recently endorsed by northerners and southerners alike in the Compromise Measures of 1850. These measures began as a way to organize the vast western territory—more than half a million square miles comprising present-day Arizona, California, western Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, and Utah—acquired by the United States at the close of the Mexican War in early 1848. A congressman during the Mexican War, Abraham Lincoln joined his Whig Party in calling the war "unnecessarily and unconstitutionally commenced" by Democratic President James Polk. When Lincoln completed his term in March 1849, he devoted himself to his neglected Illinois law practice. Not even the controversial Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, which compelled northern citizens to help capture fugitive slaves and stirred Harriet Beecher Stowe to write Uncle Tom's Cabin, pulled him back into the political limelight. But when the Kansas-Nebraska Act passed four years later, Lincoln commented that its repeal of the Missouri Compromise "aroused him as he had never been before." Guiding Questions • How did the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 attempt to reduce the growing sectionalism of the American union over the slavery controversy? • How could congressional neutrality towards slavery in the federal territories actually stir up sectional strife? Activity 1 the Kansas-Nebraska Act: Mapping the Slavery Controversy in 1854 By 1854 the United States had fulfilled its "manifest destiny" of occupying the entire geographical expanse from the Atlantic to the Pacific Oceans. The rapid settlement of the West raised to a new level of intensity the persistent question of whether or not to permit slavery to extend into the new territories. This activity requires you to contrast the maps of 1820 and 1854 so that you can see how much the nation had grown in the thirty-four year period, and to analyze new developments in the map of 1854 in order for you to appreciate the urgency of the arguments advanced in the national debate over slavery. You will work with an interactive map of the United States in 1854, observing how the country had changed from 1820 to 1854. The map is linked on the class website. As with the map of the Missouri Compromise of 1820 which you analyzed in a previous lesson, two sets of questions have been provided for this map: one to be used for a comparative study of states and territories, and the other for an analytical study of changes brought about (a) since the 1820 Compromise and (b) as a result of the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854. The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 A Comparative study of states and Territories in 1854 Question Answer Did free states and territories or slaveholding states have the most land area in 1854? (This can be calculated by adding together the square miles of all of the free states and territories, and then doing the same for the slave states. Compare the two numbers.) Which was more densely populated, the free states or the slave states? Where was the higher population of black people to be found? In what three southern states did the black population outnumber the white population? (In 1820 two southern states had a higher population of black people. Compare the 1820 map to the 1854 map to find out which southern state had experienced this rise in black population.) By 1854, how many states were free? How many states were slave states? An Analytical Study of Changes Brought about since the 1820 Compromise and (b) as a result of the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 Question Answer Using the bar graph to the right of the map, explain the uncertainty that existed in 1854 concerning the future of the balance of power between free and slave states. After the admission of California as a free state in 1850, why would the South’s insistence on popular sovereignty in the territories grow stronger? (Hint: What did the entry of California do to the balance between free and slaveholding states?) How many slave states or slave territories entered the Union after the admission of California? Considering that the West Coast was a free region in 1850, why would the South demand, at minimum, that popular sovereignty determine the slavery question in the territories of Utah, New Mexico, Kansas, and Nebraska? When northern abolitionists and free-soilers looked at the map of 1854, what might have caused them concern? When southern slaveholders looked at the map, what would have concerned them? By comparing population figures between the free and slave states and territories in 1854, which region was The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 experiencing the most growth? Activity 2 the Kansas-Nebraska Act: a Debate between two Illinoisans The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 shattered whatever peace was gained by the Compromise of 1850. In addition to organizing the U.S. Territories of Kansas and Nebraska, the act attempted to deal with the extension of slavery into this region by allowing the settlers in each territory to decide the question for themselves. Senator Stephen Douglas, who championed this policy of popular sovereignty and included it in the Kansas-Nebraska Act, unwittingly set off a firestorm of protest among those committed to stopping the spread of slavery.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Nebraska's Territorial Lawmaker, 1854-1867
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Great Plains Quarterly Great Plains Studies, Center for 1992 Frontier Solons: Nebraska's Territorial Lawmaker, 1854-1867 James B. Potts University of Wisconsin-La Cross Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/greatplainsquarterly Part of the Other International and Area Studies Commons Potts, James B., "Frontier Solons: Nebraska's Territorial Lawmaker, 1854-1867" (1992). Great Plains Quarterly. 648. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/greatplainsquarterly/648 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Great Plains Studies, Center for at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Great Plains Quarterly by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. FRONTIER SOLONS NEBRASKA'S TERRITORIAL LAWMAKERS, 1854,1867 JAMES B. POTTS In the thirty-seven years since Earl Pomeroy Nevertheless, certain facets of western po­ maintained that the political history of the mid­ litical development, including the role of ter­ nineteenth century American West needed ritorial assemblies, still require "study and "further study and clarification," Howard R. clarification." With few exceptions, territorial Lamar, Lewis Gould, Clark Spence, and other histories have focused upon the activities of fed­ specialists have produced detailed studies of po­ erally appointed territorial officials--governors, liticallife in the western territories. Their works secretaries, and, occasionally, judges---and upon have shed light on the everyday workings and the territorial delegates. 2 Considerably less study failures of the American territorial system and has been made of the territorial legislatures, have elucidated the distinctive political and locally elected lawmaking bodies that provide economic conditions that shaped local insti­ useful perspectives from which to examine fron­ tutions in Dakota, Wyoming, and other western tier political behavior and attitudes.
    [Show full text]
  • The Compromise of 1850 and the Kansas-Nebraska Act Part
    Accelerated Social Studies 05/20: The Compromise of 1850 and the Kansas-Nebraska Act ___________________________________________________________________ PART ONE: Please watch a CNN Ten from this week and summarize it below. Part Two: Videos Watch the following videos on the Fugitive Slave Law and the Kansas-Nebraska Act. Record ten important facts in the space below. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xCFrObXq3xw&feature=emb_title https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCu9zaTWD1vfTz5LQXYcjDhQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4crw4TlSxk&feature=emb_title Film notes: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Part Three: Image Analysis Examine the following two images and write a paragraph explaining how they relate to the information you learned in the film clips. Image Analysis Paragraph: Part Four: Kansas-Nebraska Act A. Read the following documents and highlight five passages you think are important Kansas Nebraska Act In 1854, Congress passed the Kansas-Nebraska Act, which organized the remaining territory acquired in the Louisiana Purchase so that such territories could be admitted to the Union as states. Probably the most important result of the Kansas-Nebraska Act was its language concerning the contentious issue of slavery. Proposed by Stephen A. Douglas, and signed by president Franklin Pierce, the bill divided the region into two territories. Territory north of the 40th parallel was called Nebraska Territory, and territory south of the 40th parallel was called Kansas Territory. The most controversial aspect of the Kansas-Nebraska Act was that each territory would decide for itself whether or not to permit slavery. This stipulation repealed the Missouri Compromise of 1820 which stated that slavery was prohibited north of 36° 30′.
    [Show full text]
  • Kansas Territory Nebraska Territory New Mexico Territory Utah Territory
    COLORADO POSTAL HISTORY The purpose of this exhibit is to show the development of the mail service in Colorado from the earliest time when still part of the Unorganized Territory. Colorado Territory was made up from four large different territories and established by act of congress on February 28, 1861. The map outlines the four regions that became the Colorado Territory later admitted to the Union as a state on August 1, 1876. Kansas Territory Nebraska Territory New Mexico Territory Utah Territory Colton Map - 1859 Courtesy of Richard C. Frajola The vast area acquired at the time of the Louisiana Purchase in 1803 was known as the Unorganized Territory. It was later divided into Kansas, Missouri and Nebraska territories. A major gold discovery in the western mountain region of Kansas in 1858-59 lead to a large migration in search of the precious metal. The four earliest settlements in the western Kansas Territory were Auraria, Denver City, Montana City and St. Charles. In a short time Denver City grew to be the larger trading area absorbing the other towns. The earliest large gold discoveries were surface placer deposits found in late 1858 through 1859 located in Clear Creek and Gilpin County. The towns of Black Hawk, Idaho, and Mountain City were quickly developed as a mining centers. The area offered much gold to eager miners. Two other major discoveries one in Boulder City district in the Nebraska Territory a short distance northwest of Denver City. The second further west over the Continental Divide in the Utah Territory on the Blue River, where the town Breckinridge was built.
    [Show full text]
  • The Wilmot Proviso the Wilmot Proviso Was a Rider (Or Provision) Attached to an Appropriations Bill During the Mexican War
    The Wilmot Proviso The Wilmot Proviso was a rider (or provision) attached to an appropriations bill during the Mexican War. It stated that slavery would be banned in any territory won from Mexico as a result of the war. While it was approved by the U.S. House of Representatives (where northern states had an advantage due to population), it failed to be considered by the U.S. Senate (where slave and free states were evenly divided). Though never enacted, the Wilmot Proviso signaled significant challenges regarding what to do with the extension of slavery into the territories. The controversy over slavery’s extension polarized public opinion and resulted in dramatically increased sectional tension during the 1850s. The Wilmot Proviso was introduced by David Wilmot from Pennsylvania and mirrored the wording of the Northwest Ordinance on slavery. The proviso stated “neither slavery nor involuntary servitude shall ever exist in any part of said territory” that might be gained from Mexico as a result of the Mexican-American War. The issue of the extension of slavery was not new. As northern states abolished the institution of slavery, they pushed to keep the practice from extending into new territory. The push for abolition began before the ratification of the Constitution with the enactment of the Northwest Ordinance which outlawed slavery in the Northwest Territory. The Louisiana Purchase in 1803 brought a large amount of new land into the U.S. that, over time, would qualify for territorial status and eventually statehood. The proviso stated “neither slavery nor involuntary servitude shall ever exist in any part of said territory” that might be gained from Mexico as a result of the Mexican-American War.
    [Show full text]
  • Article Title: Nebraska History on Nebraska Territory: a Reader's Guide
    Nebraska History posts materials online for your personal use. Please remember that the contents of Nebraska History are copyrighted by the Nebraska State Historical Society (except for materials credited to other institutions). The NSHS retains its copyrights even to materials it posts on the web. For permission to re-use materials or for photo ordering information, please see: http://www.nebraskahistory.org/magazine/permission.htm Nebraska State Historical Society members receive four issues of Nebraska History and four issues of Nebraska History News annually. For membership information, see: http://nebraskahistory.org/admin/members/index.htm Article Title: Nebraska History on Nebraska Territory: A Reader’s Guide Full Citation: James E Potter, “Nebraska History on Nebraska Territory: A Reader’s Guide,” Nebraska History 84 (2003): 162-175 URL of article: http://www.nebraskahistory.org/publish/publicat/history/full-text/NH2003NeTerritoryGuide.pdf Date: 9/07/2012 Article Summary: The author describes twenty-nine Nebraska History articles concerning the Nebraska Territory. Topics discussed include the Territorial System and the Kansas-Nebraska Act, Government and Politics, Economic and Social Development, Land Acquisition and Agriculture, Indians and Indian Affairs, Military Affairs, and Prelude to Statehood. Cataloging Information: Names: Stephen A Douglas, Joseph E Johnson, George L Miller, Robert W Furnas, William S Harney Nebraska Place Names: Omaha, Nebraska City, Brownville, Columbus, Florence, Elkhorn Valley (Cuming County) Keywords:
    [Show full text]
  • The Annals of Iowa
    The Annals of Volume 72, Number 3 Iowa Summer 2013 A QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF HISTORY In This Issue KATE HOEY and JOY SMITH analyze the context and consequences of an important legal case decided by the Iowa Supreme Court in 1956, Acuff v. Schmit. The case established a wife’s right to claim loss of consortium. The authors show, however, that although the decision did extend mar- ried women’s legal rights, it rested on a traditional cultural commitment to marriage and did not represent a fundamental change in the courts’ view of the hierarchical relationship between husbands and wives. ANNA L. BOSTWICK FLAMING describes the programs of The Door Opener, a center for displaced homemakers in Mason City. She shows, in particular, that, in a place and time marked by skepticism of both feminism and state-run antipoverty programs, The Door Opener’s success depended on a strategic use of government funds and feminist critiques to better the lives of former homemakers in Iowa. MARVIN BERGMAN reviews two new books about the Midwest by Robert Wuthnow, one about the fate of midwestern communities since the 1950s, the other about religion and politics in the region. Front Cover Two women, perhaps Shirley Sandage and Margaret Garrity, co-founders of The Door Opener, meet inside the center’s front window. For more on The Door Opener and its role in providing resources for displaced home- makers in Mason City and surrounding communities, see Anna L. Bostwick Flaming’s article in this issue. Photo from Shirley M. Sandage Papers, Iowa Women’s Archives, University of Iowa Libraries, Iowa City.
    [Show full text]
  • Nebraska and Kansas Territories in American Legal Culture: Territorial Statutory Context
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Dissertations, Theses, & Student Research, Department of History History, Department of 2008 Nebraska and Kansas Territories in American Legal Culture: Territorial Statutory Context Brenden Rensink Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/historydiss Part of the History Commons Rensink, Brenden, "Nebraska and Kansas Territories in American Legal Culture: Territorial Statutory Context" (2008). Dissertations, Theses, & Student Research, Department of History. 27. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/historydiss/27 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the History, Department of at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations, Theses, & Student Research, Department of History by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Chapter Three Nebraska and Kansas Territories in American Legal Culture Territorial Statutory Context BRENDEN RENSINK n commemorating the sesquicentennial of the 1854 Kansas- INebraska Act, it is important to understand not only the events that led to and were caused by its passage but also the very organic act itself.' This piece of national legislation caused great tension in the halls of Congress before being passed and also great ten- sion in the very territories it organized after its passing. The most shocking example of these tensions was the mini civil war, com- monly known as "Bleeding Kansas," which some historians suggest represents the first battles of the much greater Civil War. Nearly seventy years of similar territorial organic acts had been passed, but none had created such results. Was the text itself somehow different or revolutionary in form? As this analysis will show, the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 was not a revolutionary piece of legislation.
    [Show full text]
  • PASTORAL CARE for Nebraskass NATIVE AMERICANS: the SANTEE and PONCA PEOPLES
    PASTORAL CARE FOR NEBRASKA’S NATIVE AMERICANS: THE SANTEE AND PONCA PEOPLES The establishment of Indian reservations in eastern Nebraska, together with their substantial populations and inherent economic issues, taxed the energy of Nebraska Bishop Robert Harper Clarkson. He cared deeply about their humanity, but his lack of language skills and the reservations’ distance from transportation routes complicated his capability to properly minister to their needs. While the bishop had placed good missionaries among the native peoples and trusted in the latter’s expertise, he sought to establish a new missionary district, apart from the Diocese of Nebraska, with its own missionary bishop to properly pastorally care for the natives. The previously discussed Missionary District of Niobrara placed several Nebraska and Dakota tribes under the administration of Bishop William Hobart Hare, but not until 1873. For the first seven years of his missionary work in Nebraska, Bishop Clarkson visited and cared for the Santee and the Ponca Indians, as well was those discussed in the previous chapter. The stories of the Santee Sioux and the Ponca tribes follow. The historical record of the Santee Sioux before they arrived in Nebraska is a tragic one. The Santee are the fifth tribe of Nebraska Indians pastorally cared for by the Episcopal Church. In 1851, the Wahpeton and Sisseton Dakota peoples had relinquished their lands in southern and western Minnesota Territory, each taking a reservation along one of the region’s major rivers, the Upper Sioux along the Yellow Medicine River and the Lower Sioux along the Minnesota River. The Lower Sioux were not happy with their reservation lands, and after whites began encroaching on their reservation, Sioux leaders signed away another strip of land along the north side of the Minnesota River.
    [Show full text]
  • Local Government44 Tribal/Sovereign Governments45
    56 NEBRASKA: THE CORNHUSKER STATE Local Government44 Nebraska has 93 counties, 70 of which have a commissioner form of government. These 70 are each governed by a board of commissioners with three, five or seven mem- bers, elected for four-year terms. The remaining 23 counties have a supervisor-township form of government. These are governed by seven-member boards of supervisors, also elected to four-year terms. There are 530 cities and villages, or municipalities, in Nebraska. Most cities have a mayor-council form of government, while exceptions like Nebraska City have a com- missioner form of government, and several others use the council-manager form. Most villages are governed by a five-member board of trustees. Nebraska’s constitution grants the option of home rule to cities with more than 5,000 residents, meaning they may operate under their own charters. Only Lincoln and Omaha use this option. Tribal/Sovereign Governments45 Within Nebraska are four sovereign Native American tribes that have democratic forms of government. These tribes are the Omaha, Ponca, Santee Sioux and Win- nebago. Tribal governments are governed by tribal constitutions, bylaws, ordinances and laws. The governing bodies are the tribal councils, made up of elected council members who serve a term as determined by the tribal constitution. Elections are held regularly as dictated by the tribal constitution, and tribal members are allowed to vote. Membership for the Omaha, Santee Sioux and Winnebago tribes is determined by a set blood quantum percentage, as determined by documented lineal descent. Membership in the Ponca Tribe, which has no blood quantum requirement, is determined solely by documented lineal descent.
    [Show full text]
  • The United States
    Bulletin No. 226 . Series F, Geography, 37 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CHARLES V. WALCOTT, DIRECTOR BOUNDARIES OF THE UNITED STATES AND OF THE SEVERAL STATES AND TERRITORIES WITH AN OUTLINE OF THE HISTORY OF ALL IMPORTANT CHANGES OF TERRITORY (THIRD EDITION) BY HENRY G-ANNETT WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1904 CONTENTS. LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL .................................... ............. 7 CHAPTER I. Boundaries of the United States, and additions to its territory .. 9 Boundaries of the United States....................................... 9 Provisional treaty Avith Great Britain...........................'... 9 Treaty with Spain of 1798......................................... 10 Definitive treaty with Great Britain................................ 10 Treaty of London, 1794 ........................................... 10 Treaty of Ghent................................................... 11 Arbitration by King of the Netherlands............................ 16 Treaty with Grreat Britain, 1842 ................................... 17 Webster-Ash burton treaty with Great Britain, 1846................. 19 Additions to the territory of the United States ......................... 19 Louisiana purchase................................................. 19 Florida purchase................................................... 22 Texas accession .............................I.................... 23 First Mexican cession....... ...................................... 23 Gadsden purchase...............................................
    [Show full text]
  • National Historic Trails Auto Tour Route Interpretive Guide
    National Trails System National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior National Historic Trails Auto Tour Route Interpretive Guide Nebraska and Northeastern Colorado “Approaching Chimney Rock” By William Henry Jackson Chimney Rock, in western Nebraska, was one of the most notable landmarks recorded in emigrant diaries and journals. Photograph is courtesy of The Wagner Perspective. NATIONAL HISTORIC TRAILS AUTO TOUR ROUTE INTERPRETIVE GUIDE Nebraska and Northeastern Colorado Prepared by National Park Service National Trails System—Intermountain Region 324 South State Street, Suite 200 Box 30 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Telephone: 801-741-1012 www.nps.gov/cali www.nps.gov/oreg www.nps.gov/mopi www.nps.gov/poex NATIONAL PARK SERVICE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR August 2006 Contents Introduction • • • • • • • 1 The Great Platte River Road • • • • • • • 2 From Path to Highway • • • • • • • 4 “A Whiz and a Hail” — The Pony Express • • • • • 8 A “Frayed Rope” • • • • • • • 11 The Platte Experience • • • • • • • 15 Natives and Newcomers: A Gathering Storm • • • • • • • 18 War on the Oregon & California Trails • • • • • • • 21 Corridor to Destiny • • • • • • • 24 SITES AND POINTS OF INTEREST • • • • • • • 25 Auto Tour Segment A: Odell to Kearney • • • • • • • 26 Auto Tour Segment B: Omaha-Central City-Kearney • • • • • • 35 Auto Tour Segment C: Nebraska City-Central City-Kearney • • • • • • • 41 Auto Tour Segment D: Kearney to Wyoming Border • • • • • • • 43 For More Information • • • • • • • 61 Regional Map • • • • • • • inside the back cover Auto Tour Route Interpretive Guide Nebraska IntroductIon any of the pioneer trails and other Mhistoric routes that are important in our nation’s past have been designated by Auto Tour Congress as National Historic Trails. While most of those old roads and routes are Route not open to motorized traffic, people can drive along modern highways that lie close to the original trails.
    [Show full text]
  • Private Employees' Speech and Political
    PRIVATE EMPLOYEES’ SPEECH AND POLITICAL ACTIVITY: STATUTORY PROTECTION AGAINST EMPLOYER RETALIATION EUGENE VOLOKH* I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................... 297 II. THE STATUTES ................................................................. 302 A. Cross-Cutting Questions ............................................... 302 1. Criminal Liability, Civil Liability, or Both? ....... 302 2. Coverage for Existing Employees or Also for Applicants? ......................................................... 302 3. Application Only to Established Polices, or Also to Individual Employment Decisions? ...... 303 4. Application Only to Threats, or Also to Employment Decisions Made Without Threats? .............................................................. 303 5. Off-the-Job Speech or All Speech? .................... 304 6. Implicit Exceptions for Speech and Political Activity That Sufficiently Undermines Employer Interests? ............................................ 304 7. What Is the Scope of Explicit Exceptions for Speech and Political Activity That Sufficiently Undermines Employer Interests? ...................... 306 8. Do General Bans on “Threats” Apply to Threats of Loss of Employment? ....................... 308 B. Engaging in Any Off-Duty Lawful Activity—Colorado and North Dakota ....................................................... 309 C. Engaging in Activity That Doesn’t Create “Reasonable Job-Related Grounds for Dismissal”—Montana ............. 310 D. Exercising “Rights Guaranteed by the First
    [Show full text]