The Civil War, in many ways, was largely a product of the events of the early to middle 1800's. Through many events tied to the issues of slavery and the south's standing compared to the north's, America was split into two sides, the Union and the Confederates. Among these issues include the Federal Government's power compared to the rights of an individual state, economical changes, the Compromise of 1850, issues surrounding Kansas, the issue of the constitutionality of slavery withholding, debates between Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas, the Harper's Ferry raid, and the presidential election of 1860.
Federal Government’s Authority vs. States’ Rights
The main issue when it comes to the federal government's authority vs. state's rights is the act of nullification. South Carolina was unable to nullify the protective tariff during that time period, but little happened to the north when they nullified the fugitive slave act. Also, the Fugitive Slave Act brought down a very strict federal power, before it was nullified by the north, and it left little room for personal state rights. The federal government's power contributed to the cause of the civil war because it led to the nullification of the fugitive slave act, in spite of military power being brought down upon South Carolina upon its nullification of the protective tariff, and the strict federal authority may have also pushed the south away, as the majority of southerners believed in more powerful state's rights.
Economic Changes of the 1800's
The changes to the economy of the 1800's were mostly because of inventions developed during that time period. The major problem of the 1800's was distribution, as distribution was very difficult to achieve. Canals were developed in the north in order to open up several new river routes for boats to deliver goods to riverfront towns and cities. Steamboats were also developed to travel the rivers, both upstream and downstream. This method worked until the railroads were developed in the 1840's. Railroads were able to be built anywhere, which almost removed the issue of distribution entirely. It also opened up the western frontier for many people to settle. This may have contributed to the civil war, however, because as the railroads were developed and the west was opened up, many southern plantation owners from the Deep South wanted to move their slaves and cotton further west as the cotton tore up the soil. This raised the issue of slavery in these territories to the government.
Federal Government’s Authority vs. States’ Rights
The main issue when it comes to the federal government's authority vs. state's rights is the act of nullification. South Carolina was unable to nullify the protective tariff during that time period, but little happened to the north when they nullified the fugitive slave act. Also, the Fugitive Slave Act brought down a very strict federal power, before it was nullified by the north, and it left little room for personal state rights. The federal government's power contributed to the cause of the civil war because it led to the nullification of the fugitive slave act, in spite of military power being brought down upon South Carolina upon its nullification of the protective tariff, and the strict federal authority may have also pushed the south away, as the majority of southerners believed in more powerful state's rights.
Economic Changes of the 1800's
The changes to the economy of the 1800's were mostly because of inventions developed during that time period. The major problem of the 1800's was distribution, as distribution was very difficult to achieve. Canals were developed in the north in order to open up several new river routes for boats to deliver goods to riverfront towns and cities. Steamboats were also developed to travel the rivers, both upstream and downstream. This method worked until the railroads were developed in the 1840's. Railroads were able to be built anywhere, which almost removed the issue of distribution entirely. It also opened up the western frontier for many people to settle. This may have contributed to the civil war, however, because as the railroads were developed and the west was opened up, many southern plantation owners from the Deep South wanted to move their slaves and cotton further west as the cotton tore up the soil. This raised the issue of slavery in these territories to the government.
The Compromise of 1850
The Compromise of 1850 was devised by America's great compromiser, Henry Clay, to tack down several issues that plagued the country. First, no one knew whether or not the new Mexican cession territory should enter the union as free or slave territory. Also, California commissioned that it should enter the Union as a free state. However, half of the territory extended below the Missouri Compromise line. Furthermore, Texas claimed that it controlled territory up to Santa Fe, causing a border dispute. Lastly, Washington D.C. both allowed slavery and was home to the largest slave market in the entire country. The compromise decreed that Texas would be granted ten million at the request that it give up the land up to Santa Fe. This would create the territories of New Mexico, Nevada, Arizona, and Utah, whose stance on slavery would be decided by popular sovereignty. Furthermore, the slave trade would be abolished in the nation's capital and California would be admitted into the union as a free state. To counteract the imminent dishevelment of the southerners, a strengthened Fugitive Slave Act would be passed, which required northerners by law to capture escaped slaves. While this compromise kept the Union together for the short term, southerners would be outraged at the fact that California was admitted free, despite half of it being under the pro-slavery line that the Missouri Compromise guaranteed, and the northerners would be extremely dissatisfied with the fact that they were required by law to return escaped slaves. Northerners would eventually decide to nullify this law, and no action was taken by the government, which enraged South Carolina due to the fact that the time they tried to nullify a piece of legislation, Andrew Jackson brought an entire army down upon them. This would eventually cause this state to secede from the Union. The source above is extremely important due to the fact that it has explained the problems the United States faced during this period of time and the action taken to attempt to correct it.
This picture illustrates the effect of the Fugitive Slave Act, part of the Compromise of 1850. Even free blacks were at risk of being abducted by Northern law enforcement, now required to deport escaped slaves back to the south.
Kansas-Nebraska Act and Bleeding Kansas
http://civilwarmo.org/educators/resources/info-sheets/kansas-nebraska-act-bleeding-kansas
The Dred Scott Decision - Dred Scott v. Sandford, 1857
http://www.ushistory.org/us/32a.asp
Dred Scott, a slave of the John Emerson, sued for his freedom in court on the grounds of the fact that he had been living in free territory, and was therefore not a slave because of the Missouri Compromise banning slavery in those territories. This case eventually came in front of Roger B. Taney, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Taney ruled that, first, Scott had no right to sue since he was black and therefore not a citizen of the United States. He could have stopped there, but he ruled further by proclaiming that Congress had no right to ban slavery in northern territory, because slaves were property and property could not be taken away unless by due process of the law. Under those circumstances, the Missouri Compromise was now unconstitutional. This decree angered Northerners, as slavery was now legal anywhere in the country, and no amount of popular sovereignty or abolition would solve the issue.
http://www.ushistory.org/us/32a.asp
Dred Scott, a slave of the John Emerson, sued for his freedom in court on the grounds of the fact that he had been living in free territory, and was therefore not a slave because of the Missouri Compromise banning slavery in those territories. This case eventually came in front of Roger B. Taney, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Taney ruled that, first, Scott had no right to sue since he was black and therefore not a citizen of the United States. He could have stopped there, but he ruled further by proclaiming that Congress had no right to ban slavery in northern territory, because slaves were property and property could not be taken away unless by due process of the law. Under those circumstances, the Missouri Compromise was now unconstitutional. This decree angered Northerners, as slavery was now legal anywhere in the country, and no amount of popular sovereignty or abolition would solve the issue.
The video listed above is significant due to the fact that it documents all the effects of the Dred Scott Decision and makes them very easy to understand, and the issues that arose from Taney's decision.
The Seven Debates of Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas
http://www.nps.gov/liho/historyculture/debates.htm
Abarham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas were both vying for the Illinois senatorial seat, and seven debates rose up across the state. Lincoln argued that Douglas could not be trusted in the senatorial seat as he was a defender of slavery. He also attacked the issues of every previous event that occured on the path to Civil War, including the effects of the Kansas-Nebraska act and the Dred Scott decision, pointing out how America's government could not survive being both pro and anti-slavery. Douglas argued that Lincoln would doom America by eradicating slavery, and how removing slavery would promote a sense of racial equality, and America would not have that. Douglas won the senate seat, but Lincoln became a respected figure in Republican eyes, which would eventually land him in the Republican spot for the presidency.
This map depicts the seven sites that the Lincoln-Douglad debates took place.
John Brown’s Raid on Harper’s Ferry
http://www.civilwar.org/150th-anniversary/john-browns-harpers-ferry.html
John Brown, an abolitionist from Connecticut, attempted to rouse the local slave population of Harper's Ferry, West Virginia on October 16, 1859. Brown and his group of radical abolitionists raided the local armory and kidnapped significant West Virginian political figures. Brown relied on the fact that the raid would succeed in order to further his plan, which was to rouse the slaves, and supply arms to local freedom fighters. However, the West Virginian militia held him and his men down in the armory's engine house. However, Colonel Robert E. Lee and his marines captured Brown during the late afternoon of the next day. Brown was tried and found guilty of treason, murder, and slave insurrection, which landed him in the stocks of West Virginia and he was hanged on December 2nd of the same year. Brown was hailed as a hero in the eyes of the northern abolitionists, a hero of black rights in the eyes of the African-American slaves, and caused the south to reel in dismay that someone would be willing to kill to end slavery. This event proved to the southerners that the northern abolitionists were willing to fight for the end of slavery, and would raid southern towns in order to accomplish their goal. This event piled onto the already existing attacks against the south, pushing them away to secession.
http://www.civilwar.org/150th-anniversary/john-browns-harpers-ferry.html
John Brown, an abolitionist from Connecticut, attempted to rouse the local slave population of Harper's Ferry, West Virginia on October 16, 1859. Brown and his group of radical abolitionists raided the local armory and kidnapped significant West Virginian political figures. Brown relied on the fact that the raid would succeed in order to further his plan, which was to rouse the slaves, and supply arms to local freedom fighters. However, the West Virginian militia held him and his men down in the armory's engine house. However, Colonel Robert E. Lee and his marines captured Brown during the late afternoon of the next day. Brown was tried and found guilty of treason, murder, and slave insurrection, which landed him in the stocks of West Virginia and he was hanged on December 2nd of the same year. Brown was hailed as a hero in the eyes of the northern abolitionists, a hero of black rights in the eyes of the African-American slaves, and caused the south to reel in dismay that someone would be willing to kill to end slavery. This event proved to the southerners that the northern abolitionists were willing to fight for the end of slavery, and would raid southern towns in order to accomplish their goal. This event piled onto the already existing attacks against the south, pushing them away to secession.
This drawing illustrates Robert E. Lee and his marines attacking the engine house that Brown walled himself into.
The Presidential Election of 1860
http://www.ushistory.org/us/32d.asp
Democrats were split into two sides, northern and southern. Northern Democrats, while not all supporting slavery, believed that Stephen Douglas had the best chance of winning the election. Southern democrats nominated the vice-presidential candidate, John C. Breckenridge, but believed Douglas to be a traitor to southern slavery because of his support of popular sovereignty. The Republican Party chose Abraham Lincoln as their presidential nominee, due to his status as a national figure from his Lincoln-Douglas debates. A third party called the Constitutional Union Party nominated John Bell, a slaveowner from Tennessee. Lincoln only received 40% of the national vote, but because of the fact that multiple candidates were in the election, Lincoln had more than enough votes to land him in the White House. After the election, South Carolina seceded from the United States because of the many events that happened to them in the past few years, the Nullification Crisis, several congressional laws, and the North's nullification of the Fugitive Slave Act which gave them no repercussions. This election was significant to the cause of the Civil War because South Carolina started a chain reaction of southern secession from the Union.
http://www.ushistory.org/us/32d.asp
Democrats were split into two sides, northern and southern. Northern Democrats, while not all supporting slavery, believed that Stephen Douglas had the best chance of winning the election. Southern democrats nominated the vice-presidential candidate, John C. Breckenridge, but believed Douglas to be a traitor to southern slavery because of his support of popular sovereignty. The Republican Party chose Abraham Lincoln as their presidential nominee, due to his status as a national figure from his Lincoln-Douglas debates. A third party called the Constitutional Union Party nominated John Bell, a slaveowner from Tennessee. Lincoln only received 40% of the national vote, but because of the fact that multiple candidates were in the election, Lincoln had more than enough votes to land him in the White House. After the election, South Carolina seceded from the United States because of the many events that happened to them in the past few years, the Nullification Crisis, several congressional laws, and the North's nullification of the Fugitive Slave Act which gave them no repercussions. This election was significant to the cause of the Civil War because South Carolina started a chain reaction of southern secession from the Union.
No comments:
Post a Comment