the sectional crisis & the coming of the u.s. civil war, 1820-60
DESCRIPTION
The Sectional Crisis & The Coming of the U.S. Civil War, 1820-60. A guide intended to help you understand the causes of the war and how they may have shaped Reconstruction, 1865-1877. The Missouri Compromise, 1820-21. The Missouri Compromise, 1820-21. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
The Sectional Crisis & The Coming of the U.S. Civil War, 1820-60
A guide intended to help you understand the causes of the war and how they may have shaped Reconstruction, 1865-1877
The Missouri Compromise, 1820-21
The Missouri Compromise, 1820-21 The 1819 application for statehood
by the Missouri Territory sparked a bitter debate in Congress over the issue of slavery in the new territories that had been created as a result of the Louisiana Purchase of 1803.
Missouri, 1820-21 Concerned that the South
would have a representational advantage, Congressman James Tallmadge of New York introduced a bill that would prohibit any further growth of slavery in Missouri, and would eventually set the children of Missouri's slaves free.
The bill passed in the House but failed to pass the Senate.
Leaders of the slave South were appalled by Tallmadge’s efforts; Sen. John C. Calhoun predicted that unless slavery were more formally sanctioned and protected by the federal government, the union would eventually dissolve.
Missouri, 1820-21 The issue was resolved with a two-part
compromise. First, the northern part of Massachusetts became
Maine and was admitted to the Union as a free state at the same time that Missouri was admitted as a slave state, thereby maintaining a balance of 12 slave and 12 free states.
Missouri, 1820-21 Second, a line was drawn at 36 degrees 30
minutes north latitude, and any portions of the Louisiana Territory lying north of the compromise line would be free. But the compromise provided that fugitive slaves "escaping into any... state or territory of the United States...may be lawfully reclaimed and conveyed to the person claiming his or her labour or service." And even in the free territories, "slavery and involuntary servitude ... in the punishment of crimes" was not prohibited.
South of 36/30, slavery was permitted.
The compromise -- an unanswered question: where would the 36/30 line end?
Slave Rebellions, 1800-31
Slave Rebellions
What do they mean? How did white Southerners –
masters, in particular – interpret them?
How did the rise of abolitionism in the North affect such Southerners?
Why did the rebellions occur in these particular years?
“Indian Removal” in the 1830s
“Indian Removal”
Why did the federal government pursue this policy?
How was the policy related to slavery?
Overview of Continental Expansion, 1780s-1850s
Expansion forces the question of slave labor or free labor in the new territories There are conflicting visions of the
“just” society and social order in the North & South.
This conflict informs the debate over slavery expansion prior to the Civil War.
Most of the new territory west of the Mississippi River comes to the U.S. as a result of its War with Mexico in the 1840s.
The Problem of Slavery in the Mexican Cession Slavery traditionally kept out of
politics Congressional power over slavery
includes setting conditions to accept territories
as states forbidding slavery in new states
Mexican Cession of 1848 directly raises the question of slavery in new territory
The Wilmot Proviso Launches the Free-Soil Movement Mexican War mobilizes antislavery groups Antislavery – Free-Soilism – is not the same as
Abolitionism Very few Northerners were abolitionists – less
than 1%, in fact. Wilmot Proviso of 1846 seeks to outlaw slavery
in the new territories gained from Mexico. Why? To ban black Americans, and thereby to preserve the new territories for white farmers.
This encapsulates the politics of Abraham Lincoln – see Hofstadter.
Proviso passes in House, fails in Senate
1848: Free-Soilism becomes a force in presidential politics
President Taylor Precipitates a Crisis Taylor proposes admitting California
and New Mexico as states immediately
The White South reacts angrily Proposed Nashville convention
prompts the possibility of Southern secession
Forging a Compromise Henry Clay’s compromise package
California admitted as a free state slave trade, but not slavery, prohibited in
District of Columbia strong fugitive slave law enlarged New Mexico/Utah territory will be
admitted on basis of “popular sovereignty” This overturns the territorial ban on slavery
enacted by the Missouri Compromise, therby enraging “Free-Soilers”
The Compromise of 1850
Political Upheaval, 1852-1856 Whigs and Democrats manage
controversy in 1850 But the territorial question destroys
both parties in 1850s
The Kansas-Nebraska Act Raises a Storm 1854--Stephen Douglas introduces
Kansas-Nebraska bill apply popular sovereignty to Kansas,
Nebraska Formal repeal Missouri Compromise line
Act passes on sectional vote Most Northerners outraged
The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854
The Kansas-Nebraska Act Raises a Storm (2) Mass defection among Northern
Democrats “Anti-Nebraska” candidates sweep
North in 1854 congressional elections
Democrats become sole Southern party
Republican Party is organized
Kansas and the Rise of the Republicans Republican party unites former
Whigs, Know-Nothings, Free-Soilers, Democrats
Appeals to Northern sectional sympathies
Defends West for white, small farmers
“Bleeding Kansas” helps Republicans struggle among abolitionists, proslavery
forces for control of Kansas territory Republicans use conflict to appeal for
voters
“Bleeding Kansas”
Sectional Division in the Election of 1856 Republican John C. Frémont seeks
votes only in free states Democrat James Buchanan defends
the Compromise of 1850, carries election
Republicans make clear gains in North
The House Divided, 1857-1860 Sectional quarrel becomes virtually
irreconcilable under Buchanan Growing sense of deep cultural
differences, opposing interests between North and South
Cultural Sectionalism
Major Protestant denominations divide into northern and southern entities over slavery
Southern literature romanticizes plantation life
South seeks intellectual, economic independence
Northern intellectuals condemn slavery
Uncle Tom's Cabin an immense success in North
The Dred Scott Case, 1857 Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857):
Supreme Court can decide on slavery in the territories
Court refuses narrow determination of case
Major arguments Scott has no right to sue because neither
he nor any other black person, slave or free, a citizen
Congress has no authority to prohibit slavery in territories, Missouri Compromise unconstitutional
Ruling strengthens Republicans
Debating the Morality of Slavery Lincoln, in 1858 race for the U.S.
Senate: decries “Southern plot” to extend slavery promises to work for slavery’s extinction casts slavery as a moral problem defends white supremacy in response to
Douglas Douglas accuses Lincoln of favoring
equality Lincoln loses election, gains national
reputation
The South's Crisis of Fear October, 1859--John Brown raids
Harper’s Ferry Brown executed, mourned as martyr
by abolitionists Republicans seen as radical
abolitionists Most white Southerners convinced
they must secede on election of Republican president
The Election of 1860: Democrats Party splits Northern Democrat Stephen Douglas Southern Democrat John
Breckenridge
The Election of 1860: Constitutional Union Party Candidate John Bell Promises compromise between
North and South
The Election of 1860: Republicans Abraham Lincoln nominated
home state of Illinois crucial to election seen as moderate
Platform to widen party’s appeal free homesteads for small, white
farmers Lincoln wins by carrying North,
mostly on a campaign grounded in “Free Soil, Free Labor, Free Men”
Explaining the Crisis Republicans a strict sectional party Fundamental conflict of values Southern values
paternalism, generosity, white supremacy slavery defended on the grounds of race
Northern values Free Soil, Free Labor, Free Men each person free and responsible slavery tyrannical and immoral White supremacy
Implications for Reconstruction?What are they?