nothing of Kansas by name in 1854, and were required to purchase new maps to ascertain its location.

The people of Missouri from the first favored the organization of the Territory west of their State, on the principle of self-interest. Hon. Willard P. Hall, representative from Missouri, introduced the first bill for that purpose. Senator Atchison opposed it at the first session of the thirty-second Congress, but favored it at the second on account of the instructions of his constituents.

The Missourians had not the least idea or expectation but that when it "come in," as they expressed it, it would come in as Free Territory, until the question of repealing the Missouri Compromise was raised by pro-slavery politicians.

The birth-day and parentage of this design cannot be definitely determined. Both Atchison and Douglas claimed its paternity. One thing, however, is certain that early in 1853, the former in the city of Weston on a goods-box made a speech in which he said "he would oppose the admission of Nebraska into the Union as a Free State with the last drop of his blood; he would oppose the Missouri Compromise to his last breath; he would have that odious Missouri Compromise repealed, which made men either give up their negroes, or give to Northern cattle the finest farms in Nebraska. American citizens should be privileged to go where they pleased and carry their property with them, whether that property was furniture, mules or niggers. On that question, when it should come up, he pledged himself to be faithful; that the Missouri Compromise should be repealed. What will you do if the Missouri Compromise is not repealed? Will you sit down here at home, and permit the nigger thieves, the cattle, the vermin of the North to come into Nebraska and take up those fertile prairies, run off your negroes and depreciate the value of your slaves here? I know you well; I know what you will do; you know how to protect your own interests; your own rifles will free you from such neighbors and secure your property. You will go in

there if necessary with bayonets and with blood. But we will repeal the Compromise. I would sooner see the whole of Nebraska in the bottom of hell than see it a Free State."

Mr. Atchison continued to make similar speeches to the above during the summer of 1853 over Western Misouri. He denounced Hon. Thos. H. Benton, the best friend and purest statesman Missouri ever had, as a traitor to his State and an abolitionist, because he opposed the repeal of the Missouri Compromise. This Cataline of the Border continued his harrangues until the feelings of the people were all aflame with prejudice and hatred towards persons from the free States.

Those unacquainted with the inhabitants of the Border at that time cannot well comprehend how that public sentiment could so easily be swayed and shaped by drunken, vulgar and inflammatory speeches. First were the native Missourians, who were a singular class of people and have not perhaps, their prototypes in the world-certainly not in the United States. Their fathers were chiefly renegades from the Eastern States, who had fled to escape the just desert for crimes committed. They inherited all the vices of their ancestors, and had learned many new ones. They were incredulous and suspicious of strangers and easily excited against them. When enraged they were as furious as a mad dog and as cowardly and unmanly as a jackal. They had no conclusions, but only beliefs. They never know anything but by rumor. They had few ideas and opinions of their own, but gather them from their leading men. No matter how clearly a stranger might demonstrate a truth to them they would not believe it. No matter how absurd a proposition advanced by one of their favorite leaders might be, they would embrace it as coming from the Oracle of Truth. Utter stangers to principles, they were never happier than when in meanness. Loud in their professions of law and order, there was not a week passed during which robberies, murders and disturbances were not committed. Whenever an individual became un

popular in community, he was accused of all kinds of mis-doings and evil designs, warned to leave-which failing to observe, he was attacked by a mob, his property destroyed, and lucky he was if he escaped with his life. Infatuated plebians; Proud of the appellation of "Sovereigns," which the courting politician of the Border flung out like Roman largesses among them, their enslavement was worse than that of the . contemned African. Whiskey was held in high esteem by all classes, and celebrated lecturers on temperance were frequently insulted by continued threats and horrid oaths during their discourses. On a certain occasion at one of the chief towns of the Border, a celebrated champion in the temperance cause was grossly insulted by a ruffian rushing up and pulling his nose in the midst of his lecture, while the audience applauded the outrage. The following day the city papers lavishingly complimented the perpetrator of the offense and offered in imposing capitals a reward of one cent for the "absconded lecturer."

Of native Missourians there were two classes-the wealthy and the poor-holding about the same relation to each other as did the planters and the poor whites of the South. The poor were much the more numerous; but being ignorant and pecuniarily dependent upon their wealthy neighbors, they were the pliant tools of the latter. It is remarkable that Missouri though having as large a school fund as any State in the Union, has had no system of public schools until recently.

Both classes of native Missourians along the Border were at that time alike unscrupulous, ungenerous and ignoble. The wealthy, highly aristocratic, possessed all the cravings to rule of Southern slave masters. Though full of blarney and suavity, with the exterior polish of gentlemen, they would not shrink from any measure to attain their ends. Many of them had become very wealthy from the commerce of the prairies. The above remarks apply entirely to native born Missourians-regular, genuine "Pukes."

With both of these elements were mingled a large number

from the free and slave States, the first of whom generally adopted in a great measure the habits, peculiarities and prejudices of the Missourians and became their boon companions, during the Kansas troubles, though possessing a great deal of native manliness; while the other in most instances retained their former feelings and principles, and were the staunchest free State men and greatest sufferers during the Kansas conflict.

There were also a peculiar, though powerful, class along the Border, composed chiefly of native Missourians, who might justly be termed the loungers and loafers. They accompanied trains across the Plains, went on hunting expeditions, and had generally been through the Mexican war. They were a powerful class-the military of the Border. They formed the mobs, did the stealing and a good share of the drinking. They were ever ready for adventure, any thing wild and daring.

The wealthy and aristocratic were enlightened and viciously refined. They were the prime movers in every public measure, possessing not only the influence and consideration of the slave master, but, also, the train master; they by a little strategy and caution controlled the rabble and the poor class of inhabitants. It has been said that many of this class did not approve of the unjust measures to make Kansas a Slave State. While this is true in some cases, it must also be remarked that they enjoy the odious honor of being the instigators of the outrages which followed, and many of them vied with the rabble in the grossness of their conduct and the atrocity of their acts. Those who laid claims to respectability and honor and who had been so reputed before the Territorial troubles, where they entered into the strife, entirely lost sight of their manhood and plunged into the excesses of infamy and outrage. Many of these individuals since the political elements became still, have reinstated themselves in the esteem and confidence of society. But while it is becoming that society should throw a mantle of oblivion over

their past misconduct, it is the painful duty of the faithful historian to exhibit the past in its real light.

Individuals who heartily disapproved of the course pursued by the Missourians dared not raise their protest against it for fear of personal violence or destruction of their property. In cases where the blind and hot-headed policy pursued, was mildly rebuked, happy was the offender against public sentiment if his life and property did not pay the for

feit.

Such was the character of the elements into which the fiery and inflammatory appeals of Hon. D. R. Atchison were thrown. He understood their character and knew well how to prepare them for the coming struggle. As he figured conspicuously in the early part of the Territorial history of Kansas and has been rather a remarkable man, a short account of his life is here given.

David R. Atchison was born in Fayette County, Kentucky, on the 11th day of August, 1807. His father was an industrious farmer of influence in his neighborhood. David at an early age was put into a grammar school, from which he was transferred to Transylvania University, where he graduated. In 1828 he began the study of law as a student in Lexington Law School, where he remained for two years.

After having thus finished his school preparation he emigrated to Clay County, then the extreme border of Missouri. Adapting himself at once to the society of the frontier, ambitious of distinction, he soon became a person of notoriety in that section of the country. In 1834 he was elected to the lower House of the State Legislature, and in 1838 was again clected to the same position. He was, during this session of the Legislature, chosen Major-General of the Militia that were to operate against the Indians. Although he never saw any active service, he ever afterwards retained the title of General. In 1840 he was beaten as a candidate for the Legislature by a small majority, and in 1841 was elevated to the bench of the Platte Judicial Circuit. After filling this po