Therefore the South and their prominent political leaders were staunch defenders, and promoters of slavery. One of the most adamant pro-slavery politicians was John C. Calhoun. Calhoun even believed that slavery was actually good for slaves. "The experience of more than half a century, I informed Pakenham, convinced me that it would be neither humane nor wise to abolish slavery. The census of 1840 and other records showed that, in all instances in which northern states had abolished slavery, the condition of the African, instead of being improved, had become worse." (57) Needless to say, Calhoun was determined to make slavery allowed in the new states, and believed that the north had ulterior motives behind their intentions to do otherwise. When addressing the Wilmot Proviso, Calhoun called it, "a scheme to monopolize the powers of the general government, to obtain sole possession of its territories and ultimately to attack our domestic institution." (65).
Another position taken on the territorial slave issue was an idea known as popular sovereignty. It was a notion shared by a minority of northerners, including Stephen Douglas and Lewis Cass. Popular sovereignty would put the slavery question into the hands of new states themselves, letting them decide whether or not to become a slave state. This idea was one that would appeal to both sides of the issue, and take it out of the hands of Congress. Although popular sovereignty seemed like a feasible plan, it had weaknesses. One of which was its ambiguity; when exactly would these states have to render a decision on their position on slavery? For one, President Abraham Lincoln (Congressman at the time) disapproved of popular sovereignty. .
"I would pound Judge Douglas with my own interrogatories, endeavoring to put him on the defensive by exposing all his vague, contradictory, and inconsistent stands on slavery in the territories.
