Wikipedia.org man... wikipedia. Just type in Whig party. But I just looked it up for you and it seems like there was a split on in 1854, the Kansas-Nebraska Act where the party was divided on which side to support. Also the founder of the Whig party had died in 1852 I think.
2007-07-18 17:58:58
·
answer #1
·
answered by Capitão Darius Emboabas 2
·
2⤊
6⤋
One key word (for the death of the Whigs AND the 'American Party') -- NEBRASKA
The main thing that destroyed the Whig Party was a North-South split over slavery, a division that afflicted ALL politics in the 1850s. There were fissures over the "Compromise of 1850" (which was not actually a compromise at all, since the different pieces were passed by very different coalitions), esp. on the strengthened Fugitive Slave Law, which many the North despised.
At the same time, the party was less and less able to compete on the national level -- the 1852 Presidential candidate in 1852 (Scott) lost to the Democrat (Franklin Pierce) in a landslide. And the death of two of its founders and stars --Henry Clay and Daniel Webster-- didn't help matters.
The 'final straw' was the Kansas-Nebraska bill (1854), which overturned the Missouri Compromise and cut against the free soil position (that Congress could and should keep slavery from expanding into the territories). Southern Whigs, rather than following their party, followed their section, voting with Southern Democrats for this bill.
The reaction in the North was various "anti-Nebraska" parties. The Republican Party quickly picked up prominent Northern Whigs and leaders of the Free-Soil movement to become the main player.
This burning issue was also what prevented the American Party ("Know Nothings") from becoming the replacement for the Whigs, for their unity was built largely around nativism; their Northern and Southern wings suffered the same split on slavery-related issues. In 1856, under Southern influence, the party endorsed pro-Southern Millard Fillmore, but the Northern wing largely abandoned him, most supporting the Republican candidate (Fremont).
Meanwhile, the Democrats were fracturing as well. Though it tolerated more Southern domination, eventually that became too much, till in 1860 North and South supported different candidates for President (Douglas and Breckenridge, respectively), handing the race to the Republicans.
2007-07-25 03:16:18
·
answer #2
·
answered by bruhaha 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
For the best answers, search on this site https://shorturl.im/awerr
The underlying problem was the increasing sectional divide between the Northern and Southern wings of the party, which was intensifying in the early 1850s. The "last nail in the coffin" was the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854. The support for this bill, which UNDID the Missouri Compromise, and so could allow slavery into northern territories, was mostly on sectional, not party lines. Southern Whigs sided with Southern Democrats (and some Northern Democrats but NOT Whigs) in support of this bill. This caused problems in the Democratic Party (and divisions that contributed to their 1860 split, allowing the Republican victory, whence secession and war), though the fact that the Democrats were nationally dominated by their southern wing tempered the results. But it was devastating to the Whig Party which had never been as cohesive to start with... and which was now bereft of the generation of leaders (above all of Henry Clay) who had formed the party and helped keep it together.
2016-04-04 03:46:15
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Death Of The Whig Party
2016-11-07 09:23:53
·
answer #4
·
answered by Erika 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The Whig Party, in the United States, was for most of its history concerned with promoting internal improvements, such as roads, canals, railroads, deepening of rivers, etc. This was of interest to many Westerners in this period, isolated as they were and in need of markets. Abraham Lincoln was a Whig for most of this period.
The name came into use in the 1680s in England when there was the threat of establishment of a line of Catholic Kings, starting with James II. The Protestant element, who held that Parliament could prevent such a succession, came to be called Whigs after a radical Presbyterian group in Scotland, the Whigamores, while the party tending to the doctrine of the rights of King James II (and naturally containing Catholic as well as simply royalist elements), were called Tories after some bands of Irish Catholics who had been driven to become outlaws due to the crusade of the English against the church they clung to.
The designation of British loyalists during the American Revolution - as Tories - is well known. And many on the revolutionary side must have identified with the English Whigs, which continued to be the party in favor of Parliament's keeping the king in check. The Republican Party, while it also attracted many anti-slavery Democrats, drew off so many Whigs that they effectively killed the Whig party. The Whigs were also badly hurt by the short-lived Native American or Know-Nothing party, which was primarily anti-immigrant and anti-Catholic. This party was strong in urban areas, which had also been a Whig stronghold. The last year the Whigs had a presidential candidate was in 1856.
2007-07-18 18:53:44
·
answer #5
·
answered by sparks9653 6
·
2⤊
2⤋
Ignore any suggestion and any comments by people suggesting that Wikipedia has any actual value as a legitimate reference.
The Whig party ceased to be in the 1850's, when abolitionists who were afraid of Zachary Taylor(being a southern slaveholder) became the whig nominee. The party split into factions with the republicans being against the extension of slavery and during the Civil War, began to push for abolition itself.
The reason that the American party did not emerge as a majority party in the north is very simple, the AMERICAN PARTY was an antiforeign, anti-Catholic secret society more popularly known as the Know-Nothing party, since when people asked people who were involved in the American Party movement, they claimed to know-nothing about it.
whale
2007-07-19 02:37:40
·
answer #6
·
answered by WilliamH10 6
·
3⤊
3⤋
i wish we had wig parties.. i would so dress up like that if i could...
and have the big white/blonde hair that was huge..
we should try to bring that style back!
2007-07-18 17:58:03
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
9⤋