Sectional Rivalries Expand or Slavery, Slavery, Slavery
I. The Radicalization of the Anti-Slavery Movement
A. summarize the impact of major slave revolts Gabriel Prosser (1800), Denmark Vesey
(1822), and Nat Turner (1831) - The revolts of Prosser, a slave, and Vesey, a free man,
unsuccessful because they were betrayed by informers, led to the hanging of the revolt leaders
and followers. Preacher Nat Turner's revolt resulted in the slaughter of numerous women and
children. The increased frequency of slaves revolts led white masters to crack down harder on
the slaves. Feeling as if they were going to be overthrown one day, slaveowners used the whip,
bloodhound, and branding iron on slaves for protection. The theory that whites were racially
superior also emerged and the South's abolitionist progress slowed.
B. American Colonization Society founded (1817) – Anti-slavery societies, like the
American Colonization Society, began forming around the Revolution and were most popular
with Quakers. As a part of early abolitionist actions, the American Colonization Society helped
transfer blacks back to Africa. Because there was such hatred toward blacks in the United States,
sending the blacks back to Africa was one of the first abolitionist efforts. They were sent to
colonies in Africa that were founded for ex-slaves, however, many blacks, had become
Americanized and did not want to live in a new society in Africa. Support for Colonization lasted
until the Civil War.
C. ideas and impact of William Lloyd Garrison and his Liberator publication - Garrison
was a fierce abolitionist. In his newspaper, The Liberator, he wrote about antislavery, setting off
a war of words and ultimately contributing to the causes of the Civil War. Garrison was also an
influential speaker, so much that other abolitionists joined him and they formed the Anti-slavery
Society. Although he was deep set in his beliefs, he often got carried away in his own
righteousness and became more concerned with the North separating itself from the South than
how the separated South would end slavery on its own. This showed that Garrison's solution to
slavery did not lie in politics.
D. describe the work of Theodore Weld and the Tappan Brothers (1830s) - Theodore
Weld and the Tappan Brothers were abolitionists. Theodore Weld, who had been converted by
Charles Finney during the second Great Awakening, believed slavery to be a sin. Weld
especially connected with rural people and uneducated farmers. Inspired by Finney, Theodore
Weld attended Lane Theological Seminary. The Tappan Brothers, Arthur and Lewis, were both
rich merchants from New York and they paid the fee for Weld to attend the Seminary. However,
Weld was suspended for an anti-slavery debate that he helped to organize, and began to preach
anti-slavery throughout the North-West. In 1839, Theodore Weld wrote a pamphlet called
American Slavery As It Is, which became one of the most successful abolitionist writings.
E. Frederick Douglass and his Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass (1845) Douglass was born a slave but escaped north at age twenty-one where he became an abolitionist.
He lectured frequently about antislavery, despite threats against his life, and wrote an
autobiography, Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, detailing how he was only half black
yet still slave-born, his struggle to become literate, and ultimately how his escape to the North. A
practical man, Douglass, unlike Garrison, looked to politics to help solve the slavery issue,
backing the Liberty, Free Soil, and eventually Republican parties.
F. Harriet Tubman and the Underground Railroad (1849) - The Underground Railroad
helped lead runaway slaves to safety. Going from safe, anti-slavery home to anti-slavery home,
the slaves were lead by black and white abolitionists from the South up to Canada, where the
slaves would be free. One of the most prominent abolitionists that helped bring slaves to safety
through the Underground Railroad was Harriet Tubman. Harriet Tubman, a runaway slave
herself, bravely helped to free over three hundred slaves. The loss of slaves angered the South
and they pushed Congress to pass stricter fugitive slave laws.
II. The Politics of Slavery
A. Missouri Compromise (1820) - Congress admitted Missouri as a slave state, despite
abolitionist pleas. However, Congress also admitted Maine as its own state, keeping the balance
between the amount of North and South states. To satisfy the abolitionists, the Compromise
prohibited slavery in the rest of the Louisiana Purchase territory, but not in Missouri, as slavery
supporters wanted. Slave-owners were not too angry with this term because most of the land
north of Missouri was prairie, and therefore not the best land for slave labor.
The Compromise was labeled a dirty bargain for all of its horse-trading; it favored the
South in some aspects but gave the North some things in return. It didn't actually resolve the
slavery issue, but it lasted for many years, helping to hold the shaky states together. However,
the slavery conflict raged on and the breakup of the Union waited in the future.
B. the gag rule (1836-46) - As the debates over slavery raged on, it began to threaten
other rights throughout the country, like free speech. Abolitionists from all over the country sent
overwhelming amounts of petitions to Congress, in response, members of Congress who
supported the South passed the gag resolution. The gag resolution stopped all antislavery
petitions from being debated in Congress, infringing on the peoples’ right to petition. The
resolution especially angered ex-president John Q. Adams who fought for the gag rule’s appeal
for eight years until he succeeded and the resolution was appealed.
C. Wilmot Proviso (1846) - This piece of legislature stated that slavery would be
prohibited in all land acquired in the Mexican War, meaning Texas to California. Northern
abolitionists favored this document, but Southern senators blocked its passage. Since this
legislature wasn't passed, the slavery debate continued to heat up. It threatened to shake up the
Whigs and Democrats and split politics along North-South sectional lines.
D. Liberty Party (1840) and Free Soil Party form (1848) - While some abolitionists
wanted the North to secede from the South, many abolitionists thought that slavery would be
ended through politics. Those abolitionists gave their support to the Liberty party in 1840 and
later in 1848, to the Free Soil Party. The Free Soil party advocated their stand against slavery and
attracted followers who were opposed to slavery for several different reasons. For the most part,
the Free Soil party wanted to abolish slavery, not because it was cruel to blacks, but because it
would benefit whites. The Free Soil party became the first step in the founding of the Republican
Party.
E. Election of 1848 - The Democrats nominated General Lewis Cass. He ran against
Whig nominee Zachary Taylor, and not Henry Clay, who had made too many enemies to have a
chance at winning. Taylor's platform avoided troublesome issues and focused mainly on his
virtues. Like the Democratic platform, Taylor did not take a side on the issue of slavery in the
territories. However, Democratic candidate Cass made it very clear that he believed, under
popular sovereignty, the people of the territory should decide whether or not to allow slavery.
The people liked popular sovereignty because it supported democracy and self-determination,
while politicians liked it for its compromise-like way of solving the slavery issue. Northern antislaveryites who trusted neither Taylor nor Cass formed the Free Soil party. They nominated
Martin Van Buren and their platform supported issues such as anti-slavery and their motto "Free
soil, free speech, free labor, and free men." They attracted a variety of voters by campaigning for
federally funded internal improvements and government-paid homesteads for settlers, as well as
those who didn't side strongly with either of the two major parties. Toward the end of the
campaign, the personality attacks began, but they aided Taylor and his wartime popularity was
able to win him the presidential election. Cass was a close second, but Van Buren's support from
New York Democrats took enough attention away from Cass to secure Taylor's victory.
F. the California Gold Rush (1849) - The discovery of gold in California caused flocks of
people to move west to California. However very few people actually got rich and most people
would have benefitted more from staying where they were. California and their government were
not prepared for the huge population jump and crime rates soared. Californians, who sought
protection from these crimes, struggled with the task of creating a sufficient state government.
They soon wrote a constitution which eliminated slavery and also asked Congress for admission
to the Union. Since that meant California would skip the territorial stage, many southern
politicians, who opposed more free lands, greatly opposed California’s requests.
G. Compromise of 1850
1. Causes and proposals from Clay, Calhoun, and Webster (7th of March Speech) The causes of the Compromise were that free-soil California wanted to become a state, while
Southerners were threatening to secede. In an attempt to solve the crisis, many statesmen
gathered in Congress; key speakers were Henry Clay, John C. Calhoun, and Daniel Webster.
Clay proposed a series of compromises in which he urged the North and South to make
concessions, and the North to enact more reasonable fugitive slave laws. Calhoun defended the
South. Although he understood Clay's concession idea, he rejected it because it did not protect
the South enough. Instead, he pled for slavery to be left alone and runaway slaves returned.
Calhoun wanted the South to be given its rights as a minority and he wanted to regain the
political balance. Webster also understood Clay's compromises. He supported concessions to the
South and a new fugitive slave law. He also didn't want to legislate on the issue of slavery in the
territories because he believed that the territory gained from Mexico could not be used for slave
labor. To Webster, the crisis of 1850 could only be resolved through compromise, concessions,
and reason. This speech by Webster pointed the North in the direction of compromise.
2. the compromise and reactions-The compromise of 1850 was a series of
concessions between the North and South to try to save the Union. The concessions to the North
consisted of admitting California as a free state, giving New Mexico the disputed land with
Texas and ending slave trade in Washington, DC. The concessions to the South were no
restrictions on slavery in the new territories of New Mexico and Utah, Texas would receive $10
million as a compensation for the land it lost to New Mexico and that the Fugitive Slave Law
would be made stronger.
The compromise was hard fought for and the reactions were strong on both sides of the
Union. Southerners became more fiercely pro slavery while prosperity and reluctance to war
helped many to accept the compromise. The North got the better of the compromise especially
because California was accepted as a Free State and shifted the balance in their favor
permanently. Enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Law was met by anger in the North and
galvanized the Abolitionist movement.
H. Election of 1852 - The Democrats, at a standstill about who to nominate, finally
brought another "dark horse" on to the American scene, New Hampshire lawyer-politician
Franklin Pierce. Pierce was unknown to most people, and therefore enemyless. He was accepted
by proslavery Democrats because he supported the south, and his platform focused on finalizing
the Compromise of 1850, including the Fugitive Slave Law. With a platform that also praised the
Compromise of 1850, the Whigs nominated military hero Winfield Scott because of their luck
with military heroes in the past. However, the slavery and sectionalism issues were toned down
and the personality attacks resumed. Pierce was ragged on for his unknown military history
while Scott was criticized for being pompous. Luckily, the Whig party was split; northern Whigs
liked Scott, but not his platform, while southern Whigs favored the platform over the actual
candidate; making it easy for Pierce to secure a landslide victory for the Democrats.
The Election of 1852 marked the end of the Whig party, eliminating Whigs from the
political arena within the next few years. This foreshadowed the fall of national parties, replaced
by the rise of sectional politics.
I. Kansas-Nebraska Act (1854) – Stephen Douglas looked to end the gridlock between
the North and South over westward expansion and to development of the Pacific Railroad. To get
the support of the South he proposed the Kansas-Nebraska act. The Kansas-Nebraska act split
the Nebraska territory into two territories, Nebraska and Kansas. Then, whether or not each
territory would be a slave state was to be determined by popular sovereignty. However, Nebraska
was located on land that the Missouri Compromise of 1820 had banned slavery from and the
Compromise was considered to be as important as the Constitution by many Northerners.
Douglas pushed the bill through Congress and the Missouri Compromise of 1820 was repealed.
The decision angered and upset many Northerners, and the Kansas-Nebraska Act helped lay the
ground of the Civil War.
J. Republican Party forms (1854) - The Republican Party was a result of the KansasNebraska Act. The Act wrecked the Compromises of 1820 and 1850 and destroyed the
Democratic Party. Many anti-slaveryites were at their breaking point with the "slavocracy" and
its desire for Kansas. The Republican Party sprang up in the Mid-West to protest the gains of
slavery and it quickly gathered support and spread eastward. The party included a variety of foes
of the Kansas-Nebraska Act, such as Whigs, Democrats, Free-Soilers, and Know-Nothings. It
took shape quickly, becoming the second major political party virtually overnight, and was able
to elect a Speaker of the House of Representatives within a couple years. The Republican Party
was purely sectional, the rift between the North and South now too apparent to avoid, and was
not allowed south of the Mason-Dixon Line.
K. Election of 1856 – James Buchanan, John C. Fremont, and Fillmore ran against each
other in the Election of 1856. Buchanan, the Democratic nominee, was a Pennsylvanian lawyer
who had no association with the Kansas-Nebraska act, Fremont, the Republican nominee, had no
political experience, and Fillmore, the Know-Nothing party’s nominee, threatened the
Republican’s support. Both parties attacked the other’s candidate; Buchanan because he was a
bachelor, Fremont because he was an illegitimate child and the accusation that he was Roman
Catholic. Since Fremont’s honesty and judgment were questioned and Northerners looked to
preserve the union as well as their business with the south, James Buchanan won the election.
However, the Republicans had much to be happy about as well, since such a young party had
made such a dent in the Democratic Party.
III. Slavery and Expansion
A. Gadsen Purchase (1853) - The United States coveted Mexico territory just south of
New Mexico because it was the best place for them to build a railroad. Secretary of War
Jefferson Davis had James Gadsen, a known railway man, appointed minister to Mexico. Gadsen
went to Mexico to negotiate with Santa Anna. In need of money, Santa Anna agreed to give the
United States the desired territory in exchange for a large sum of money. This treaty was meet
with criticism from American northerners because the land area, all desert, was no bigger than
South Carolina and clearly not worth what the U.S. was spending for it. However, the Senate
approved the negotiation, giving the southerners more claim to put the railroad in the South. The
South was more favorable because the mountains were lower and the territory that it would go
through was organized, as opposed to the unorganized northern territory of Nebraska. This
reasoning angered the North because they would organize Nebraska if that was the only thing
stopping the government from building a railway there instead. It caused hostility from the
Southerners in Congress.
B. Ostend manifesto (1854) - Cuba was attractive to expansionists in the South and
acquisition of it would strengthen their position again in the Senate. Secretly, American ministers
in France, Spain and England met in Ostend, Belgium to work on a plan to acquire Cuba from
Spain. The Ostend Manifesto supported buying Cuba from Spain for $120 million and justified
seizing it if Spain resisted. When the secret meetings were discovered Northerners were angered
and Pierce, embarrassed, was forced to drop his plans for seizing Cuba.
IV. Slavery and Economics
A. Impending Crisis of the South by Hinton Helper (1857) - Hinton Helper was a
nonaristocratic white man from North Carolina who hated slavery as well as blacks. He wrote a
book that attempted to prove that whites who didn't have slaves were most affected by slavery.
However, its effect on this group of people was very small. The book was published in the North
because no one in the South would publish it; they banned, and frequently burned, it. On the
contrary, the book was widely used in the North, for Republican campaign literature. Southerners
were outraged that the North was spreading "lies" about them. This added to their motives to
separate themselves from the Union.
B. Panic of 1857- A financial crisis occurred in 1857 and wreaked havoc on the
economy. Inflation caused by the influx of California gold, too much grain, and over speculation
triggered the downturn. Cotton helped the South to withstand the crises and the North was harder
hit by the panic. Tariffs had been reduced in 1857 because of demands from the South who was
benefiting from cotton trade abroad. Northerners blamed the low tariffs on their problems and
gave them fuel for the upcoming election.
V. Passion and Violence Unleashed
A. Uncle Tom’s Cabin Published (1852) - Uncle Tom’s Cabin, written by Harriet
Beecher Stowe after the passing of the Fugitive Slave Law, addressed the cruelty of slavery and
especially of families being separated. The novel gained much popularity as it accurately
portrayed the wickedness of slavery to people, and after reading the novel, many Northerners
refused to enforce the Fugitive Slave Law. Uncle Tom’s Cabin was not only a literary force, but
also a political force. The novel played a role in the start of the Civil war and also gave
Northerners, most who had never witnessed slavery first hand, an image of slavery and reminded
them of why they were fighting to end it.
B. Bleeding Kansas (1856-61)
1. Violence in the Kansas Civil War - The Kansas Civil War was precipitated by
the attack on the free-soil town of Lawrence, Kansas. Proslavery raiders shot townsfolk and
burned parts of the city. In retaliation, abolitionist John Brown, who had recently moved to
Kansas, led an attack on the Pottawatomie Creek. He and a group of followers butchered
proslaveryite men. This led to the true beginning of the Kansas Civil War. An enormous amount
of property was destroyed, numerous lives were taken, and agriculture was put on hold in many
areas as a result. However, the Kansas Civil War brought enough people into the territory in
order for it to apply for statehood.
2. LeCompton Constitution- In 1857, when Kansas had enough people to request
statehood, those who supported slavery wrote the LeCompton Constitution. The people had to
vote for the constitution with slavery or without slavery, but were not allowed to vote for or
against the entire constitution. However, the catch was that even if they voted for the
Constitution without slavery, the Constitution still protected the slave owners that already lived
in Kansas. Many people were angered by this and did not vote at all which left the proslavery
people to approve of the Constitution with slavery. President Buchanan gave all of his
administration’s support to the LeCompton Constitution, dividing the Democratic Party, while
Senator Douglas fought against it. In a compromise, the entire Constitution was to be voted on
and the voters in Kansas voted and shot it down.
C. the caning of Senator Charles Sumner (1856) - Senator Sumner was a fierce
abolitionist from Massachusetts. Angered by the misuse of popular sovereignty, he criticized
proslaveryites and insulted South Carolina Senator Andrew Butler in his speech "The Crime
Against Kansas." South Carolina Congressman Preston Brooks, a distant cousin of Butler, would
not let Sumner speak badly of his well-like cousin, and ultimately, of South Carolina. The
Southern custom was to duel, but as Sumner was not Brooks' social equal, Brooks took it upon
himself to find an alternative punishment for the offender. Soon after, he approached Sumner in
the Senate chamber and beat him over the head, repeatedly, with a heavy cane until it broke. No
senators dared to interfere, leaving Sumner to fall to the floor, bleeding and unconscious.
However much in the wrong Brooks was, he didn't receive enough votes to be expelled
for his actions, but he resigned. He was later reelected, as was Sumner, who was in Europe
receiving treatment at the time. Northerners united under Sumner's speech, but the whole
incident displayed the danger of inflamed passions. The incident was known as Bleeding
Sumner, an allusion to Bleeding Kansas. The blows Sumner received could be seen, in a sense,
as the first of the Civil War.
D. Dred Scott Decision (1857) – After living on free soil with his master for several
years, Dred Scott, a black slave, sued for his freedom. The Supreme Court decided that Dred
Scott could not sue in federal courts because he was a black slave, not a citizen. Since slaves
were considered private property, the court ruled that it was legal to hold slaves no matter what
territory they were brought into and going even further, they declared that the Missouri
Compromise of 1820 was never constitutional and that the government did not have the right to
ban slavery in any area. The courts ruling angered many people who viewed it as merely an
opinion and not a real decision. The Dred Scott Decision made southerners very happy, but the
northerners and republicans angry. The decision was one more event that helped begin the Civil
War.
E. the Lincoln-Douglas Illinois Senate debates (1858)
1. Lincoln's House Divided Speech* - Abraham Lincoln gave his House Divided
Speech when he received the Republican nomination for senator. The speech was part of the
Douglas-Lincoln debates in which he and Stephen Douglas debated for the seat in the Senate.
Although Lincoln ultimately lost, his speech had a great impact on politics. In his speech, he
urged the United States to become either all slavery or all free because they would not be able to
survive as divided as they were. As a Republican, Lincoln opposed slavery and thought that
popular sovereignty was not a good solution to the slavery issue. He believed people would want
slavery in the territories, therefore making the whole country a slave nation. He promised that he
would fight whatever institution that allowed slavery in the U.S.
2. Douglas’ Freeport Doctrine- In the second debate between Lincoln and
Douglas, Lincoln pressed his opponent on whether slavery could be voted down by the
inhabitants of a territory or whether the Dred Scott decision would prevail. In the response by
Douglas, known as the Freeport Doctrine, he stated that the people’s vote would prevail
regardless of how the Supreme Court would rule. Laws supporting slavery would have to be
passed by the territories for slavery to exist and they would not be passed if the people were
against them. This led to Douglas winning the senate seat in Illinois.
F. John Brown and Harper's Ferry (1859) - John Brown, a prominent abolitionist, devised
a scheme to create a black free state. He planned to invade the South with a band of followers,
get the slaves to rise and give them weapons to revolt with. He was able to get the arms and the
followers and they successfully arrived at Harper's Ferry in Virginia. There, he took over the
federal arsenal, but killed or wounded a number of innocent men in the process. The slaves at
Harper's Ferry did not recognize Brown's attempt and they didn't rise. Brown and his men were
quickly captured by the U.S. Marines and Brown, after being tried, was convicted of murder and
treason. In an attempt to save him, his friends and relatives all attested to his insanity; however
Brown, who was probably at least a little mentally unstable, knew that his hanging would mean
more to the abolitionist cause than any other end he met.
As a result of the Harper's Ferry incident, the South became more suspicious of Northern
abolitionists and continued to question separating from the Union. The generalizing of all
northerners as violent antislaveryites upset moderate Republicans as much as Brown's execution
angered abolitionists. They staged rallies, lowered flags, as well as other acts as tributes to John
Brown. Abolitionists felt that his hanging was unjust because he was fighting for a righteous
cause.