DOCSLIB.ORG

Causes of the Civil War Causes of the Civil War

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Causes of the Civil War Causes of the Civil War Causes of the Civil War Causes of the Civil War • Northwest Ordinance • Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 • Kentucky and Virginia • Compromise of 1850 Resolutions • Uncle Tom's Cabin • Missouri Compromise • Kansas–Nebraska Act • Tariff of 1828 • Bleeding Kansas • Nullification Crisis • Mexican American war • Nat Turner's slave rebellion • Sumner-Brooks affair • The Amistad • Dred Scott v. Sandford • Texas Annexation • Brown's raid on Harper's • Mexican–American War Ferry • Wilmot Proviso • 1860 presidential election • Ostend Manifesto • Secession of Southern States • Manifest Destiny • Star of the West • Underground Railroad • Corwin Amendment • Battle of Fort Sumter Attempted Solutions • Missouri Compromise • Wilmot Proviso • Ostend Manifesto • Compromise of 1850 • Kansas-Nebraska Act • popular sovereignty • Bleeding Kansas • Dred Scott Decision The Decision of Slavery Missouri Compromise Missouri Compromise 1820 • Regulation of slavery in the western territories • Prohibited slavery north of 36 ̊-30’ N parallel, except in Missouri • Sectional balance • Maine is a free state Part of the Texas Annexation Resolution of 1845 On the Compromise “… but this momentous question, like a fire bell in the night, awakened and filled me with terror. I considered it at once as the knell of the Union. it is hushed indeed for the moment. but this is a reprieve only, not a final sentence. a geographical line, coinciding with a marked principle, moral and political, once conceived and held up to the angry passions of men, will never be obliterated; and every new irritation will mark it deeper and deeper.” - Thomas Jefferson in a letter to John Holmes Wilmot Proviso 1846 • Would have banned slavery in any territory to be acquired from Mexico in the Mexican War or in the future • David Wilmot wrote this as part of the final negotiations as a result of the Mexican- American war • Tries several times to get it passed • House approves but fails in the Senate Ostend Manifesto 1854 • Proposal to take Cuba from Spain by force in necessary • Southern expansionists call for the acquisition of Cuba as a slave state • National security was used to justify the move • Free-soilers are outraged – Why? • Northerners later use it as a battle cry in Bleeding Kansas Compromise of 1850 Compromise of 1850 • Diffused conflict from debate over slavery in the territories gained from the Mexican-American War • Contains 5 bills in one 1. Texas gives up New Mexico (debt becomes Fed.) 2. California accepted as a free state 3. New Mexico and Utah territories have option to become slave states (avoiding Wilmot proviso) 4. South gets a stronger Fugitive Slave Act 5. Slave trade is banned in Washington D.C. Kansas-Nebraska Act • Creates new territories for settlement: Kansas and Nebraska (written by Stephen A. Douglas) • Allows new territories to decide on slavery through popular sovereignty • Result was a flood of pro- and anti-slavery proponents into those territories to vote • Republican party was created in opposition to the act (Lincoln – first president) – Mostly former Whigs and Free-Soil Democrats Popular Sovereignty "In free governments, the rulers are the servants and the people their superiors and sovereigns.“ – Benjamin Franklin • Principle that the legitimacy of the state is created and sustained by the will or consent of its people, who are the source of all political power • Closely connected to republicanism and social contract theory Bleeding Kansas • Pro-slavery settlers from Missouri were in conflict with the anti-slavery settlers • Bloodshed was a sort of mini-Civil War between 1854 and 1858 Dred Scott Decision 1857 • Issue over slaves held in free states • Scott often traveled to and stayed in free states with his master • After his master died, he sought freedom from Emerson’s wife • Ruling defined freedom of slaves.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Senators You Have to Know John C. Calhoun –
    Senators You Have To Know John C. Calhoun – South Carolina / serving terms in the United States House of Representatives, United States Senate and as the seventh Vice President of the United States (1825–1832), as well as secretary of war and state. Democrats After 1830, his views evolved and he became a greater proponent of states' rights, limited government, nullification and free trade; as he saw these means as the only way to preserve the Union. He is best known for his intense and original defense of slavery as something positive, his distrust of majoritarianism, and for pointing the South toward secession from the Union. Nullification is a legal theory that a state has the right to nullify, or invalidate, any federal law which that state has deemed unconstitutional. The theory of nullification has never been legally upheld;[1] rather, the Supreme Court has rejected it. The theory of nullification is based on a view that the States formed the Union by an agreement (or "compact") among the States, and that as creators of the federal government, the States have the final authority to determine the limits of the power of that government. Under this, the compact theory, the States and not the federal courts are the ultimate interpreters of the extent of the federal government's power. The States therefore may reject, or nullify, federal laws that the States believe are beyond the federal government's constitutional powers. The related idea of interposition is a theory that a state has the right and the duty to "interpose" itself when the federal government enacts laws that the state believes to be unconstitutional.
    [Show full text]
  • The Storycontinues
    FLORIDA . The Story Continues CHAPTER 10, The Age of Jackson (1828–1840) PEOPLE Mid 1700s: The Miccosukee Creeks settle in Florida. e Lower Creek and Upper Creek Indians moved from Georgia and Alabama to Florida in the mid-1700s. e two groups lived in Florida, but had di erent languages. e Upper Creek Indians came to be known as the Seminoles. e Lower Creek Indians, who came to be known as the Miccosukee, settled in central Florida where they built log cabins and farmed on communal plantations. Together the Seminoles and Miccosukee fought against the United States in the Seminole Wars. EVENTS 1832: The Seminole Indians are forced to sign the Treaty of Payne’s Landing. e Indian Removal Act of 1830 stated that all Native Americans who lived east of the Missis- sippi River must move to a newly created Indian Territory, in what is now Oklahoma. Two years later, Florida’s Seminole Indians were forced to sign the Treaty of Payne’s Landing, in which they stated they would move west to the Indian Territory and give up all of their claims to land in Florida. PEOPLE 1837: Chief Coacoochee (circa 1809–1857) escapes from the United States prison at Fort Marion. Chief Coa- coochee, whose name means “wild cat,” was a Seminole leader Florida. .The Story Continues during the Second Seminole War. After being captured by American soldiers in 1837, Coacoochee and a few Seminole cellmates escaped. Coacoochee returned to lead his people in See Chapter 1 battle against the United States. As the Seminole War contin- ued, the Native Americans su ered hunger and starvation when they could not plant crops to feed their people.
    [Show full text]
  • The War Officially Begins by Robert Jenkins, July 7, 2020 Blueandgrayeducation.Org
    The War Officially Begins By Robert Jenkins, July 7, 2020 blueandgrayeducation.org Bombardment of Fort Sumter | Currier & Ives On Wednesday, April 10, 1861, Confederate Gen. Pierre Gustave Toutant (P.G.T.) Beauregard, a French Creole from New Orleans, Louisiana, who was in command of the provisional Confederate forces at Charleston, South Carolina, demanded the surrender of the Union garrison of Fort Sumter in Charleston Harbor. The Federal Commander, Maj. Robert Anderson, had taught artillery tactics at West Point where the French Creole was one of his favorite pupils. Anderson, who was born at a place called “Soldier’s Retreat, Kentucky,” refused. The crisis in Charleston Harbor began on December 26, 1860, when Major Anderson moved his small force of 80 men out of the other forts surrounding the harbor to Fort Sumter, which was located at the mouth of the harbor and surrounded by water. Anderson made his move in response to the action of the South Carolina Legislature to become the first state to secede from the Union on December 20, but his refusal to voluntarily surrender the fort and his defiant act of flying the Stars and Stripes over the harbor infuriated the Confederates, who felt that Anderson should peacefully vacate Charleston and board a Federal ship for the North. Maj. Robert Anderson | National Archives Gen. P.G.T. Beauregard | National Archives Prior to his departure from office, U.S. President James Buchanan had tried to reinforce and resupply Anderson using the unarmed merchant ship, Star of the West, but this failed when the ship was fired upon by shore batteries on January 9, 1861.
    [Show full text]
  • The Skirmisher
    THE SKIRMISHER CIVIL WAR TRUST THE STORM AFTER THE CALM: 1861 VOLUME 5 THINGS FALL APART The new year of 1861 opened with secession weighing heavily on the American mind. Citing abuses of constitutional law, plans for the abolition of slavery, and a rigged 1860 presidential election, the state of South Carolina had dissolved its bonds with the Union less than two weeks before. Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, and Louisiana left by the end of January, seizing a number of Federal arsenals as they went. Northerners were agog at the rapid turn of events. Abraham Lincoln refused to surrender Federal forts in Confederate territory, but their garrisons would starve without fresh provisions. The new president, only 60 days into his first term, sent the steamer Star of the West to resupply Fort Sumter in the Charleston, South Carolina harbor. Charleston’s cannons opened fire on the ship, turning it away at the mouth of the harbor. The brief salvo showed the depth of feeling in the Rebel states. Texas left the Union, even though Texas governor Sam Houston refused to take the secession oath, telling his citizens South Carolina seceded from the Union with that “you may, after a sacrifice of countless millions of treasures and hundreds of thousands great fanfare. (Library of precious lives, as a bare possibility, win Southern independence…but I doubt it.” of Congress) In February, the newly-named Confederate States of America held its first constitutional convention. The Confederate States Army took shape, and quickly forbade any further resupplies of Federal forts. The Fort Sumter garrison was very low on food.
    [Show full text]
  • Lyman Trumbull: Author of the Thirteenth Amendment, Author of the Civil Rights Act, and the First Second Amendment Lawyer
    KOPEL (1117–1192).DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) 5/2/16 4:20 PM Lyman Trumbull: Author of the Thirteenth Amendment, Author of the Civil Rights Act, and the First Second Amendment Lawyer David B. Kopel* This Article provides the first legal biography of lawyer and Senator Lyman Trumbull, one of the most important lawyers and politicians of the nineteenth century. Early in his career, as the leading anti-slavery lawyer in Illinois in the 1830s, he won the cases constricting and then abolishing slavery in that state; six decades later, Trumbull represented imprisoned labor leader Eugene Debs in the Supreme Court, and wrote the Populist Party platform. In between, Trumbull helped found the Republican Party, and served three U.S. Senate terms, chairing the judiciary committee. One of the greatest leaders of America’s “Second Founding,” Trumbull wrote the Thirteenth Amendment, the Civil Rights Act, and the Freedmen’s Bureau Act. The latter two were expressly intended to protect the Second Amendment rights of former slaves. Another Trumbull law, the Second Confiscation Act, was the first federal statute to providing for arming freedmen. After leaving the Senate, Trumbull continued his fight for arms rights for workingmen, bringing Presser v. Illinois to the U.S. Supreme Court in 1886, and Dunne v. Illinois to the Illinois Supreme Court in 1879. His 1894 Populist Party platform was a fiery affirmation of Second Amendment principles. In the decades following the end of President James Madison’s Administration in 1817, no American lawyer or legislator did as much as Trumbull in defense of Second Amendment.
    [Show full text]
  • GUSTAVUS V . FOX and the CIVIL WAR by DUANE VANDENBUSCHE 1959 MASTER of ARTS
    GUSTAVUS v_. FOX AND THE CIVIL WAR By DUANE VANDENBUSCHE j ~achelor of Science Northern Michigan College Marquette, Michigan 1959 Submitted to the faculty of the Graduate School of .the Oklahoma State Univ~rsity in partial fulfillment of the requirements - for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS - Aug),Ul t, 1~~0 STATE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY JAN 3 1961 GUSTAVUS V. FOX AND THE CIVIL WAR Thesis Approved: _, ii 458198 PREFACE This study concentrates on the .activities of Gustavus V. Fox, Union Assistant Secretary of the Navy during the Civil War. The. investi- gation considers the role that Fox played in shaping the plans and pol- icies of the Union Navy during that conflict. The obvious fact emerges that_Fox wa; the official of foremost i~po-rt~nce in the Navy Department 'in planning all the major naval opel:'ations undertaken.by that branch of the service d~ring the Civil War. For aid on _this paper I gratefully acknowledge the following: Mr. Alton Juhlin, · Head of the Special Services Department of the University Library, for able help in acquiring needed materials for my study; Dr. Theodore L. Agnew, _wh<J critically read an·d willing assisted ·at all times; . Dr. Norbert R. Mahnken, who brought clarity and style to my subject; Dr. Homer· L. Knight, Head of the Department of History, who generously ad- vhed me in my work and encouraged ·this research effort; and Dr. John J. Beer, who taught me that there i~ more to writing than·putting woras on paper. Finally, I deeply appreciate the assistance of Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Hearing on the Equal Rights Amendment
    Written Statement of Elizabeth Price Foley Professor of Law Florida International University College of Law Hearing on the Equal Rights Amendment Committee on the Judiciary U.S. House of Representatives April 30, 2019 Chairman Nadler, Ranking Member Collins, and members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to discuss the procedures for ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment ("ERA"). I am a tenured, full Professor of Law at Florida International University College of Law, a public law school located in Miami, where I teach constitutional law. I also serve Of Counsel with the Washington, D.C. office of BakerHostetler, LLP, where I practice constitutional and appellate law. I. Background on Ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment An Equal Rights Amendment was first proposed in 1921 but did not receive approval of the requisite two-thirds supermajority of the House and Senate until March 22, 1972. The text of the proposed amendment reads as follows: Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article. Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.1 The Joint Resolution proposing the ERA contained a preamble limiting the allowed period of ratification to seven years: Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission by the Congress.2 The seven-year ratification period expired on March 22, 1979.
    [Show full text]
  • Missouri Compromise (1820) • Compromise Sponsored by Henry Clay
    Congressional Compromises and the Road to War The Great Triumvirate Henry Clay Daniel Webster John C. Calhoun representing the representing representing West the North the South John C. Calhoun •From South Carolina •Called “Cast-Iron Man” for his stubbornness and determination. •Owned slaves •Believed states were sovereign and could nullify or reject federal laws they believed were unconstitutional. Daniel Webster •From Massachusetts •Called “The Great Orator” •Did not own slaves Henry Clay •From Kentucky •Called “The Great Compromiser” •Owned slaves •Calmed sectional conflict through balanced legislation and compromises. Missouri Compromise (1820) • Compromise sponsored by Henry Clay. It allowed Missouri to enter the Union as a Slave State and Maine to enter as a Free State. The southern border of Missouri would determine if a territory could allow slavery or not. • Slavery was allowed in some new states while other states allowed freedom for African Americans. • Balanced political power between slave states and free states. Nullification Crisis (1832-1833) • South Carolina, led by Senator John C. Calhoun declared a high federal tariff to be null and avoid within its borders. • John C. Calhoun and others believed in Nullification, the idea that state governments have the right to reject federal laws they see as Unconstitutional. • The state of South Carolina threatened to secede or break off from the United States if the federal government, under President Andrew Jackson, tried to enforce the tariff in South Carolina. Andrew Jackson on Nullification “The laws of the United States, its Constitution…are the supreme law of the land.” “Look, for a moment, to the consequence.
    [Show full text]
  • Compromise of 1850 Earlier You Read About the Missouri Compromise and the Wilmot Proviso
    Compromise of 1850 Earlier you read about the Missouri Compromise and the Wilmot Proviso. Keep them in mind as you read here What is a compromise? A compromise is a resolution of a problem in which each side gives up demands or makes concession. Earlier you read about the Missouri Compromise. What conflict did it resolve? It kept the number of slave and free states equal by admitting Maine as free and Missouri as slave and it provided for a policy with respect to slavery in the Louisiana Territory. Other than in Missouri, the Compromise prohibited slavery north of 36°30' N latitude in the land acquired in the Louisiana Purchase. Look at the 1850 map. Notice how the "Missouri Compromise Line" ends at the border to Mexican Territory. In 1850 the United States controls the 36°30' N latitude to the Pacific Ocean. Will the United States allow slavery in its new territory? Slavery's Expansion Look again at this map and watch for the 36°30' N latitude Missouri Compromise line as well as the proportion of free and slave states up to the Civil War, which begins in 1861. WSBCTC 1 This map was created by User: Kenmayer and is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported license (CC-BY 3.0) [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:US_Slave_Free_1789-1861.gif]. Here's a chart that compares the Missouri Compromise with the Compromise of 1850. WSBCTC 2 Wilmot Proviso During the Mexican-American War in 1846, David Wilmot, a Democratic congressman from Pennsylvania, proposed in an amendment to a military appropriations bill that slavery be banned in all the territories acquired from Mexico.
    [Show full text]
  • Thirteenth Amendment A
    University of Cincinnati College of Law University of Cincinnati College of Law Scholarship and Publications Faculty Articles and Other Publications College of Law Faculty Scholarship 2003 Stopping Time: The rP o-Slavery and 'Irrevocable' Thirteenth Amendment A. Christopher Bryant University of Cincinnati College of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.uc.edu/fac_pubs Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, and the Legal History, Theory and Process Commons Recommended Citation Bryant, A. Christopher, "Stopping Time: The rP o-Slavery and 'Irrevocable' Thirteenth Amendment" (2003). Faculty Articles and Other Publications. Paper 63. http://scholarship.law.uc.edu/fac_pubs/63 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Law Faculty Scholarship at University of Cincinnati College of Law Scholarship and Publications. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Articles and Other Publications by an authorized administrator of University of Cincinnati College of Law Scholarship and Publications. For more information, please contact [email protected]. STOPPING TIME: THE PRO-SLAVERY AND "IRREVOCABLE" THIRTEENTH AMENDMENT • A. CHRISTOPHER BRYANT I. EXTRALEGAL AUTHORITY AND THE CREATION OF ARTICLE V ...................................... 505 II. HISTORICAL CONTEXT OF THE CORWIN AMENDMENT .......................................................... 512 III. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY OF THE CORWIN AMENDMENT ......................................................... 520 A. Debate in
    [Show full text]
  • The Coming Crisis, the 1850S 8Th Edition
    The Coming Crisis the 1850s I. American Communities A. Illinois Communities Debate Slavery 1. Lincoln-Douglas Debates II. America in 1850 A. Expansion and Growth 1. Territory 2. Population 3. South’s decline B. Politics, Culture, and National Identity 1. “American Renaissance” 2. Nathaniel Hawthorne a. The Scarlet Letter (1850) 3. Herman Melville a. Moby Dick (1851) 4. Harriet Beecher Stowe a. Uncle Tom’s Cabin (1851) III. Cracks in National Unity A. The Compromise of 1850 B. Political Parties Split over Slavery 1. Mexican War’s impact a. Slavery in the territories? 2. Second American Party System a. Whigs & Democrats b. Sectional division C. Congressional Divisions 1. Underlying issues 2. States’ Rights & Slavery a. John C. Calhoun b. States’ rights: nullification c. U.S. Constitution & slavery 3. Northern Fears of “The Slave Power” a. Sectional balance: slave v. free D. Two Communities, Two Perspectives 1. Territorial expansion & slavery 2. Basic rights & liberties 3. Sectional stereotypes E. Fugitive Slave Act 1. Underground Railroad 2. Effect of Slave Narratives a. Personal liberty laws 3. Provisions 4. Anthony Burns case 5. Frederick Douglass & Harriet Jacobs 6. Effect on the North D. The Election of 1852 1. National Party system threatened 2. Winfield Scott v. Franklin Pierce E. “Young America”: The Politics of Expansion 1. Pierce’s support 2. Filibusteros a. Caribbean & Central America 3. Cuba & Ostend Manifesto IV. The Crisis of the National Party System A. The Kansas-Nebraska Act (1854) 1. Stephen A. Douglas 2. Popular sovereignty 3. Political miscalculation B. “Bleeding Kansas” 1. Proslavery: Missouri a. “Border ruffians” 2. Antislavery: New England a.
    [Show full text]
  • H. Doc. 108-222
    THIRTIETH CONGRESS MARCH 4, 1847, TO MARCH 3, 1849 FIRST SESSION—December 6, 1847, to August 14, 1848 SECOND SESSION—December 4, 1848, to March 3, 1849 VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES—GEORGE M. DALLAS, of Pennsylvania PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE OF THE SENATE—DAVID R. ATCHISON, 1 of Missouri SECRETARY OF THE SENATE—ASBURY DICKINS, 2 of North Carolina SERGEANT AT ARMS OF THE SENATE—ROBERT BEALE, of Virginia SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES—ROBERT C. WINTHROP, 3 of Massachusetts CLERK OF THE HOUSE—BENJAMIN B. FRENCH, of New Hampshire; THOMAS J. CAMPBELL, 4 of Tennessee SERGEANT AT ARMS OF THE HOUSE—NEWTON LANE, of Kentucky; NATHAN SARGENT, 5 of Vermont DOORKEEPER OF THE HOUSE—ROBERT E. HORNER, of New Jersey ALABAMA CONNECTICUT GEORGIA SENATORS SENATORS SENATORS 14 Arthur P. Bagby, 6 Tuscaloosa Jabez W. Huntington, Norwich Walter T. Colquitt, 18 Columbus Roger S. Baldwin, 15 New Haven 19 William R. King, 7 Selma Herschel V. Johnson, Milledgeville John M. Niles, Hartford Dixon H. Lewis, 8 Lowndesboro John Macpherson Berrien, 20 Savannah REPRESENTATIVES Benjamin Fitzgerald, 9 Wetumpka REPRESENTATIVES James Dixon, Hartford Thomas Butler King, Frederica REPRESENTATIVES Samuel D. Hubbard, Middletown John Gayle, Mobile John A. Rockwell, Norwich Alfred Iverson, Columbus Henry W. Hilliard, Montgomery Truman Smith, Litchfield John W. Jones, Griffin Sampson W. Harris, Wetumpka Hugh A. Haralson, Lagrange Samuel W. Inge, Livingston DELAWARE John H. Lumpkin, Rome George S. Houston, Athens SENATORS Howell Cobb, Athens Williamson R. W. Cobb, Bellefonte John M. Clayton, 16 New Castle Alexander H. Stephens, Crawfordville Franklin W. Bowdon, Talladega John Wales, 17 Wilmington Robert Toombs, Washington Presley Spruance, Smyrna ILLINOIS ARKANSAS REPRESENTATIVE AT LARGE John W.
    [Show full text]