The sudden and rude awakening from this rest came in 1854 with the
repeal of the Missouri Compromise. The overland travel to California
after the year 1848 had given to the intervening territory an
importance far in excess of its actual population. It early became
desirable to admit into the Union both Kansas and Nebraska; and the
question arose whether slavery should be excluded according to the act
of 1820. The slave-holding residents of Missouri were hostile to the
exclusion of slavery. It was situated just beyond their border, and
there is no wonder that they were unable to see any good reason why
they could not settle there with their slaves. They had the sympathy of
the slave states generally.

On the other hand, the free states were bitterly opposed to extending
the slave power. To them it seemed that the slaveholders were planning
for a vast empire of slavery, an empire which should include not only
the southern half of the United States, but also Mexico, Central
America, and possibly a portion of South America. The advocates of
slavery certainly presented and maintained an imperious and despotic
temper. Feeling was running high on both sides in the early fifties.

A leading cyclopedia concludes a brief article on the Missouri
Compromise with the parenthetical reference,--"see DOUGLAS, STEPHEN A."
The implication contained in these words is fully warranted. The chief
event in the life of Douglas is the repeal of the Missouri Compromise.
And the history of the Missouri Compromise cannot be written without
giving large place to the activity of Douglas. His previous utterances
had not led observers, however watchful, to suspect this. In the
compromise of 1850 he had spoken with great emphasis: "In taking leave
of this subject, I wish to state that I have determined never to make
another speech upon the slavery question.... We claim that the