Election of 1860
The Election of 1860 was when Abraham Lincoln won the Presidency. President Lincoln was a member of the Republican Party (which was created in response to the Kansas-Nebraska Act), and he was from Illinois. The election of President Lincoln caught the South by surprise, and angered them. The reason why this surprised them was because Abraham Lincoln was not even on the ballot in some of the southern states. Since he was not on the ballot in some states, it showed that the South almost did not even have a voice on important events, and this is what angered the southern states. South Carolina responded to the election almost at once, and they were the first state to secede from the Union. Also, Georgia would go on to secede on January 19, 1861. This election spurred the secession movement in the South.
http://www.barbdahlgren.com/wp-content/uploads/Abraham_Lincoln.jpg
Secession in Georgia, and Alexander Stephens
Georgia's Secession Convention decided that the state would secede from the Union, and this happened on January 19, 1861. There were secessionists and cooperationists who voted on whether or not to leave the Union. Secessionists wanted to secede from the Union, while cooperationists wanted to stay in the Union. The vote was in favor for secession, however it was not as unanimous in other states. Alexander Stephens was originally not sure about secession, and he supported the Compromise of 1850 (as long as the Fugitive Slave Act was passed). However, he soon realized that there was no way the state would be able to avoid secession, and he was chosen as the Vice President for the Confederacy. The South chose Alexander Stephens as Vice President because he was not originally in favor of secession. This gave the South diversity and they appealed to more people with Alexander Stephens as the Vice President of the Confederacy. It showed that if someone who originally did not want to secede but then changed his mind, that seceding was appealing.
http://www.occidentaldissent.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/alexander-stephens.jpg
Saturday, January 11, 2014
Kansas-Nebraska Act and the Dred Scott Case
Kansas-Nebraska Act
The Kansas-Nebraska Act was created in 1854, when Kansas and Nebraska wanted to be admitted as states into the Union. The Union decided if the states should be slave or free states in a much different way than the Missouri Compromise intended. Remember that no slavery was allowed north of the 36 30 parallel. However, now the two states would vote on if they should allow slavery or not. This process successfully repealed the Missouri Compromise. When Kansas voted to decide if slavery was allowed or not, the state had a civil war between pro-slavery and anti-slavery forces. In response to the Kansas-Nebraska Act, the Republican Party was created. The party's original goal was to stop the spread of slavery, but not entirely abolish it. The Republican Party also wanted to modernize the economy. Since the states got to vote on slavery, the South became scared of losing political power in the Senate.
http://baltimoreorgan.com/organ/images/stories/afound1.JPG
Dred Scott Case
The Dred Scott Case occurred in 1857. The case was that a slave named Dred Scott lived in free states for more than two years while accompanying his owner as he traveled across the Union. Dred Scott then sued for his freedom and the case went to the Supreme Court. When the court decided on a ruling, the North was angered by it. The Supreme Court ruled that Dred Scott was not a citizen and therefore he could not sue anyone in court. This made northerners furious because they now saw the Supreme Court as being on the South's side (even some of the judges that ruled on the case owned slaves). The Dred Scott Case really strengthened the abolitionist movement and divided the Union even more.
http://www.learnnc.org/lp/media/uploads/2009/06/dredscott.jpg
The Kansas-Nebraska Act was created in 1854, when Kansas and Nebraska wanted to be admitted as states into the Union. The Union decided if the states should be slave or free states in a much different way than the Missouri Compromise intended. Remember that no slavery was allowed north of the 36 30 parallel. However, now the two states would vote on if they should allow slavery or not. This process successfully repealed the Missouri Compromise. When Kansas voted to decide if slavery was allowed or not, the state had a civil war between pro-slavery and anti-slavery forces. In response to the Kansas-Nebraska Act, the Republican Party was created. The party's original goal was to stop the spread of slavery, but not entirely abolish it. The Republican Party also wanted to modernize the economy. Since the states got to vote on slavery, the South became scared of losing political power in the Senate.
http://baltimoreorgan.com/organ/images/stories/afound1.JPG
Dred Scott Case
The Dred Scott Case occurred in 1857. The case was that a slave named Dred Scott lived in free states for more than two years while accompanying his owner as he traveled across the Union. Dred Scott then sued for his freedom and the case went to the Supreme Court. When the court decided on a ruling, the North was angered by it. The Supreme Court ruled that Dred Scott was not a citizen and therefore he could not sue anyone in court. This made northerners furious because they now saw the Supreme Court as being on the South's side (even some of the judges that ruled on the case owned slaves). The Dred Scott Case really strengthened the abolitionist movement and divided the Union even more.
http://www.learnnc.org/lp/media/uploads/2009/06/dredscott.jpg
The Compromise of 1850, Fugitive Slave Act, and the Georgia Platform
The Compromise of 1850, Fugitive Slave Act, and the Georgia Platform
Like the Missouri Compromise, the Compromise of 1850 was formed with the help of Henry Clay. The reason why this compromise was created was because California wanted to be included in the Union as a free state. However, this would create a disruption in the balance of free and slave states. In response to this, California did end up being a free state in the Union. Also, Texas gave up land but they also received ten million dollars. Another part of the deal was that the slave trade, but not slavery, was abolished in Washington D.C. The last, but possibly the most controversial part of the deal, was that the Fugitive Slave Act was passed. This law required that all citizens, even in the North, help return escaped slaves. If you did not do this and got caught, you were denied a trial. There was an increase in federal agents to enforce the law too. This controversial act only strengthened and bolstered the abolitionist movement in the North. Neither the North nor the South was very content with what each other received in the compromise. Finally, the Georgia Platform accepted the Compromise of 1850 as long as the North complied with the Fugitive Slave Act, and that they would not try to ban slavery in new territories or states. Like the Missouri Compromise, the Compromise of 1850 had components that the North and South disagreed about. This deal temporarily reduced the likelihood of the South seceding from the Union.
http://etc.usf.edu/clipart/51600/51643/51643_omnibus_lg.gif
Like the Missouri Compromise, the Compromise of 1850 was formed with the help of Henry Clay. The reason why this compromise was created was because California wanted to be included in the Union as a free state. However, this would create a disruption in the balance of free and slave states. In response to this, California did end up being a free state in the Union. Also, Texas gave up land but they also received ten million dollars. Another part of the deal was that the slave trade, but not slavery, was abolished in Washington D.C. The last, but possibly the most controversial part of the deal, was that the Fugitive Slave Act was passed. This law required that all citizens, even in the North, help return escaped slaves. If you did not do this and got caught, you were denied a trial. There was an increase in federal agents to enforce the law too. This controversial act only strengthened and bolstered the abolitionist movement in the North. Neither the North nor the South was very content with what each other received in the compromise. Finally, the Georgia Platform accepted the Compromise of 1850 as long as the North complied with the Fugitive Slave Act, and that they would not try to ban slavery in new territories or states. Like the Missouri Compromise, the Compromise of 1850 had components that the North and South disagreed about. This deal temporarily reduced the likelihood of the South seceding from the Union.
http://etc.usf.edu/clipart/51600/51643/51643_omnibus_lg.gif
The Missouri Compromise
The Missouri Compromise
The Missouri Compromise was proposed by Henry Clay in 1820. This compromise was made because Missouri wanted to become a slave state. However, if Missouri was admitted as a slave state, there would be more slave states than free states. This was a problem because if either side (the South or the North) had more states on their side, they would have more political power. This would result in it being easier for the side with more states to pass laws in their favor. Because of this, the compromise was made. Missouri was entered as a slave state, and Maine was created and admitted as a free state. Also, there was a line drawn called the 36 30 parallel. There was no slavery allowed north of the line, and slavery was allowed south of the line. This compromise added to the tension between the North and the South because neither one side wanted the other to have more political power. However, it helped develop a temporary solution to the problem of free and slave states being created.
http://thomaslegion.net/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/missouricompromiseof1820map.jpg
The Missouri Compromise was proposed by Henry Clay in 1820. This compromise was made because Missouri wanted to become a slave state. However, if Missouri was admitted as a slave state, there would be more slave states than free states. This was a problem because if either side (the South or the North) had more states on their side, they would have more political power. This would result in it being easier for the side with more states to pass laws in their favor. Because of this, the compromise was made. Missouri was entered as a slave state, and Maine was created and admitted as a free state. Also, there was a line drawn called the 36 30 parallel. There was no slavery allowed north of the line, and slavery was allowed south of the line. This compromise added to the tension between the North and the South because neither one side wanted the other to have more political power. However, it helped develop a temporary solution to the problem of free and slave states being created.
http://thomaslegion.net/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/missouricompromiseof1820map.jpg
Friday, January 10, 2014
Sectionalism, States' Rights, and Nullification
Sectionalism
Sectionalism means tension among regions, and thinking about your needs before everyone else's. During this time period, the North and the South had very different perspectives about economy and slavery. The North was leaning more toward a progressive society with a lot more industry. The people living in this region saw the South as stagnant and their economy was based on agriculture. The bases of regional economies varied throughout the Union. In the northeast, the economy was based on manufacturing and dairy or cattle. In the midwest, they focused on farming corn and wheat. The upper south's economy was based on tobacco, as well as corn and wheat. Finally, the lower south focused a lot on farming cotton on large slave plantations. Furthermore, the two main regions (North and South) were divided on the issue of slavery. In the North, most people were anti-slavery but not all were abolitionists. These people believed that the right to enjoy liberty is unalienable. Also, that all people should have the right to be educated. Most Northerners thought that slave owners were man-stealers, and that slavery was immoral. On the contrary, pro-slavery people believed that they were helping slaves by providing them with a place to live and food to eat (this idea was referred to as Paternalism). The North and South were very divided during this time period.
http://www.mromara.com/uploads/3/6/5/1/3651573/3676116_orig.png
States' Rights and Nullification
Another cause of the Civil War was when South Carolina decided to assert their states' rights by ignoring and nullifying the federal tariff law. The idea of states' rights is that the needs of the states come before the needs of the nation. This is like sectionalism because people in South Carolina thought that their region was better and more important than the nation. South Carolina nullified the tarrif law because they felt that it only hurt their economy. Since South Carolina has many ports, the tariff law took away a lot of money that the state could have made. When the state did nullify the law, war almost broke out when President Jackson sent troops to South Carolina. These events were very important because it showed that the South was serious, and there was a real possibility of war.
http://wwp.greenwichmeantime.com/images/usa/south-carolina.jpg
Sectionalism means tension among regions, and thinking about your needs before everyone else's. During this time period, the North and the South had very different perspectives about economy and slavery. The North was leaning more toward a progressive society with a lot more industry. The people living in this region saw the South as stagnant and their economy was based on agriculture. The bases of regional economies varied throughout the Union. In the northeast, the economy was based on manufacturing and dairy or cattle. In the midwest, they focused on farming corn and wheat. The upper south's economy was based on tobacco, as well as corn and wheat. Finally, the lower south focused a lot on farming cotton on large slave plantations. Furthermore, the two main regions (North and South) were divided on the issue of slavery. In the North, most people were anti-slavery but not all were abolitionists. These people believed that the right to enjoy liberty is unalienable. Also, that all people should have the right to be educated. Most Northerners thought that slave owners were man-stealers, and that slavery was immoral. On the contrary, pro-slavery people believed that they were helping slaves by providing them with a place to live and food to eat (this idea was referred to as Paternalism). The North and South were very divided during this time period.
http://www.mromara.com/uploads/3/6/5/1/3651573/3676116_orig.png
States' Rights and Nullification
Another cause of the Civil War was when South Carolina decided to assert their states' rights by ignoring and nullifying the federal tariff law. The idea of states' rights is that the needs of the states come before the needs of the nation. This is like sectionalism because people in South Carolina thought that their region was better and more important than the nation. South Carolina nullified the tarrif law because they felt that it only hurt their economy. Since South Carolina has many ports, the tariff law took away a lot of money that the state could have made. When the state did nullify the law, war almost broke out when President Jackson sent troops to South Carolina. These events were very important because it showed that the South was serious, and there was a real possibility of war.
http://wwp.greenwichmeantime.com/images/usa/south-carolina.jpg
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)