Source B suggests that there were other reasons for Douglas’s bill. One of the reasons was to construct a transcontinental railroad based in Chicago as its eastern terminus. Douglas owned the Chicago site thus made it easier. Besides, he also made the bill to gain support from the Southerners for his Presidential Election. The Southern Senators first rejected the bill because the territory was located in the northern half of the Louisiana Purchase, which prohibited slavery, but Douglas decided to declare the Missouri Compromise void and integrated the principle of popular sovereignty. As a result, gained the Southerners support.
Source C by President Buchanan supports the Douglas’s policy because to him it was a way to end the subject on slavery that had been running for so long. At the same time, he hoped that the sectional parties would disappear. In the source, it was said that popular sovereignty would be applied to the question of slavery. Hence slavery could either be included or excluded in a state subject to the people’s demand. Therefore, Kansas should be accepted as a state whether or not it wanted slavery. This source could relate to Source D by Stephan Douglas where he also emphasized on the fact that people should be allowed to choose the constitution they wanted to live for and it wasn’t for New York or Missouri to complain about Kansas’ decision on slavery.
Source E supports the Douglas’s policy but challenges it at the same time. It is explained in source E that Douglas’s bill was convincing as he believed that slavery wouldn’t exist unless it was paid. Other than that, he thought the climate of Kansas and Nebraska were not suitable for any plantations therefore no slaves were needed. Stephan Douglas thought that popular sovereignty would help to cease the slavery question. Douglas didn’t realize that the Kansas-Nebraska act would lead to more bloodshed as this angered the northerners who found slavery as a moral problem.
Douglas’s policy of applying the principle of popular sovereignty to the Kansas-Nebraska issue was not entirely reasonable. The reason for this is because, the bill obviously violated the Missouri Compromise and it was considered immoral and injustice. In addition it was stated in the compromise that the northern half was part of the Louisiana Purchase which they prohibited slavery. The territories claimed by Douglas to be based on popular sovereignty were clearly in the Louisiana Purchase hence popular sovereignty should’ve been void. Although, a compromise could’ve easily been ignored as it had been years and popular sovereignty would have helped to end the question on slavery as it was based on what the territories wanted and not the congress. But due to Douglas’s futility, the issue on this ended up badly.