The reasons for the formation of the KS Territory are a bit more complicated than that. The real issues of the time were the constant struggle and domination by certain special interests (sound familiar?). Slavery merely masked the real issue. Lets recall the Compromise of 1850 and the Wilmot Priviso which both forbade slavery in the territories aquired by the Mexican-American War. Thus in 1854 the NE Territory was formed and the question of slavery was not as issue since it was north of the 1850 Compromise line. But here is the kicker. At the same time there was an ever increasing call for a transcontinental railroad, and IL senator Stephen Douglas was determined that the eastern terminus would be Chicago. Therefore, the railroad would then have to pass through the NE Territory on its way west. In order to secure the line, law enforcement would have to be established and therefore, a territorial government. This would not sit well with southerners. So to gain their support for a Chicago terminus, Douglas proposed the NE Territory be split in two-KS and NE- and that the slavery issue be decided by popular vote. This would repeal the MO Compromise, and satisfy southerners who considered prohibitions to slavery an insult to their honor and a blow to Southern equality in the Union. The result was the KS-NE Act of 1854. Dan Hogan --- Wolfman <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm not sure what the reasons for the formation of > Kansas were, other than > enough folks had settled the area for it to qualify > for statehood. Other > than that, it could have been the sectional violence > over the slavery issue > immediately prior to the War.> Will > > > But, Will, what were the reasons behind the > formation of Kansas? I am not > > familiar with them, so please enlighten me. Dan Hogan [email protected]