The U.S. Constitution Contribution To The Beginning of a War After the creation of the Constitution, in the late 1700s there were many individuals who had different opinions on how the Constitution should be practiced. A decent amount of the population believed in “loose construction”, while there were also many people who believed in “strict construction”. The Constitution has created internal problems, for example the Civil War, which had hundreds of thousands of casualties and also caused a split between the union. The factors that led to the failure of the union created by the Constitution were the rise of secession, the ratification of the Compromise of 1850, and the differentiating views on states’ rights. The rise of secession can …show more content…
The Compromise of 1850 also cause social problems. Even though the Compromise of 1850 made California a free state, made most of the newly obtain Mexico territory decide slavery under popular sovereignty, and gave the South a new slave state(Doc A), there were still issues such as the Fugitive Slave of 1850. The Northerners refused to follow the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850, and many more citizens became abolitionist because of the law. For example in (Doc C) it shows a poster, stating to African Americans that Boston police officers will be slave catchers, and kidnappers. This Document shows the direct defiance that many northerners made, increasing the anger that the Southerners had. The Southerners actually agreed to the Compromise of 1850, mainly because of the reissued Fugitive Slave Law, however after many Southerners became aware of Northerners not following the law, they became aggravated. However many Northerners believed that the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850 was ludicrous, for example Ralph Waldo Emerson (Doc D). After the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850 was issued, many African Americans were kidnapped, this led to Ralph’s statement of how terrible the constitution is. The significance of this document is that it displays the issues the North had with the Fugitive Slave Law of
Historians have viewed the idea of white dominance as a key element to the legacy of slavery. Losing this dominance with the concept of emancipation was mind boggling. However, the admission of California into the Union required it to enter as a free state according to the Compromise of 1850. Losing white dominance in the newly acquired regions in the West frightened Southern slave holders. Leading to the long trek of individuals from both the North and the South to ensure their version of destiny in the West.
The year of 1776 was a time of revolution, independence, and patriotism. American colonists had severed their umbilical cord to the Mother Country and declared themselves “Free and Independent States”.1 The chains of monarchy had been thrown off and a new government was formed. Shying away from a totalitarian government, the Second Continental Congress drafted a document called the Articles of Confederation which established a loose union of the states. It was an attempt at self-government that ended in failure. The Articles of Confederation had many defects which included a weak central government that lacked the power to tax, regulate trade, required equal representation and a unanimous vote to amend the Articles, and had only a legislative branch. As a result the United States lacked respect from foreign countries. These flaws were so severe that a new government had to be drafted and as a result the Constitution was born. This document remedied the weak points of the federal government and created one that was strong and fair, yet still governed by the people.
Originally thought of as a benefit to slaveholders, the act ended up hurting the Southern cause for slavery. The act not only allowed escaped slaves to be hunted in the North, but also required federal marshals to assist slave catchers. In spite of the fact that each section received and experienced many benefits, I think that the north seemed to gain the most from the Compromise of 1850. The equilibrium of the Senate was at the present time with the free states, in spite of the fact that California often voted with the south in regards to many issues in the 1850s. The major success for the purpose of the south was the Fugitive Slave Law. In the final analysis, the north refused to impose it. “Massachusetts even called for its nullification, stealing an argument from John C. Calhoun. Northerners claimed the law was unfair. The flagrant violation of the Fugitive Slave Law sets the scene for the tempest that emerged later in the decade.” Yet at this point in time, Americans anticipated that the fragile peace would succeed. In conclusion, the North got more advantages because California was admitted as a free state, minimizing the Southern on voting power in Congress. This is the reason why Northerns perceived that they should make a pro-Southern signal by accepting the new Fugitive Slave Act. It horribly rebounded them, evoking and arousing sympathy for oppressed
In 1789, the Confederation of the United States, faced with the very real threat of dissolution, found a renewed future with the ratification of the Constitution of the United States. This document created a structure upon which the citizens could build a future free of the unwanted pitfalls and hazards of tyrannies, dictatorship, or monarchies, while securing the best possible prospects for a good life. However, before the establishment of the new United States government, there was a period of dissent over the need for a strong centralized government. Furthermore, there was some belief that the new constitution failed to provide adequate protection for small businessmen and farmers and even less clear protection for fundamental human rights.
In 1850, the government issued the Compromise of 1850 that had five main points, but there were three key statements that made it important. The first key point was that California would enter the Union as a free state, which meant that the
During and after the turmoil of the American Revolution, the people of America, both the rich and the poor, the powerful and the meek, strove to create a new system of government that would guide them during their unsure beginning. This first structure was called the Articles of Confederation, but it was ineffective, restricted, and weak. It was decided to create a new structure to guide the country. However, before a new constitution could be agreed upon, many aspects of life in America would have to be considered. The foremost apprehensions many Americans had concerning this new federal system included fear of the government limiting or endangering their inalienable rights, concern that the government’s power would be unbalanced, both within
One item in the Compromise of 1850 was the provision for a stronger Fugitive Slave Law. This new law made it a federal crime to not return a runaway slave to the south. The law also established that any suspected runaway slave was to be tried by a single judge, not by a jury. Also, these judges were compensated by a system that provided them with more money for deciding that the slave was guilty than innocent. This law obviously encouraged people not to harbor runaway slaves, and when they were caught, it provided the judge an incentive to have them returned to the south.
People debated on the illegality of the Constitution’s formation. Those who were involved in the public debate about the Constitution considered the creation of the document as an illegal act. Some Anti-Federalists believed that the men sent to the constitutional convention had surpassed the limits of the assignment originally given to them, which was to modestly adjust the Articles of Confederation. Federalists disputed that the articles needed to be eliminated rath...
The Constitution had to be ratified by the states before it went into full effect; however, states had different ideas and hopes for their new government, so a national debate over ratifying the constitution sparked. In general, there were two big parties that had opposing ideas; the federalists supported the constitution, and the anti-federalists did not support this fairly new document. Additionally, the constitution needed 9 out of 13 states to sign off the Constitution before it became official, but in order for the Articles of Confederation to be amended there had to be a united consent within the nation. The major fears produced by the writing and ratification of the United States constitution stemmed from the difference between classes; for instance, the “common man” had different views and opinions compared to the “elite man.”
The Compromise of 1850 brought relative calm to the nation. Though most blacks and abolitionists strongly opposed the Compromise, the majority of Americans embraced it, believing that it offered a final, workable solution to the slavery question. Most importantly, it saved the Union from the terrible split that many had feared. People were all too ready to leave the slavery controversy behind them and move on. But the feeling of relief that spread throughout the country would prove to be the calm before the storm.
As the first written agreement between states in America, the Articles of Confederation was bound to have flaws. The tyrannical force of Britain before the American Revolution caused Americans a sense of distrust and therefore the Articles were hesitant towards the idea of a strong national government for fear of another absolute monarchy. However it made the national government was incredibly weak therefore it created problems internally, internationally, and economically. The Constitution, a revised version of the Articles, fixed nearly all these problems.
With Millard Fillmore’s signing of the Compromise of 1850, California entered the union as a free state and the rest of the Mexican Cession would be able to come in with popular sovereignty. Emphasizing the power of the people, popular sovereignty meant the territory would be open to slavery based on what the majority of citizens wanted. Depicting a clear divide between Slave and Free states based on region, a map of the status of slavery in the United States in 1850 exemplifies one of the core sectional differences that led to the Civil War (Doc 1). Amplified by Enlightenment ideals, the Second Great Awakening inspired many abolitionists to discuss the immorality of slavery and the Fugitive Slave Law, a part of the Compromise of 1850 that gave slave owners the right to recapture runaway slaves. Transcendentalist Ralph Waldo Emerson held the belief in the citizens’ right and responsibility to disobey unjust laws set by a government, using a comparison of the cessation of the international slave trade to call for the end of the immoral Fugitive Slave Law. Emerson’s support for Civil Disobedience of the unjust laws involving slavery demonstrated the different feelings about slavery that split the country (Doc 3). In the North, where many runaway slaves now
The United States had a history of underprivileged and fearful Americans during this period of 1945 to 1961, it had evolved into r African Americans having civil rights, American society of modernization and dismantling communism. In Doc 1, 5, 7 contained African Americans political and social issues before the Civil Rights Movement, as well as Doc 4, 6 contained the fear of communism; therefore, Doc 2, 3 contained adaptable within American society.
"The 1850's was a time of attempted compromise when compromise was no longer possible." This quote best describes this time period, because Americans were trying to compromise their views to prevent a large conflict, but there were many events which made a compromise impossible. The Fugitive Slave Act was part of the Compromise Act of 1850. This act required that authorities in the North had to assist southern slave catchers to retrieve and return slaves to their owners. Southerners favored this act because they saw no slavery in the territories to the west, by the passing of the Fugitive Slave Act it would help preserve slavery in the south.
During the construction of the new Constitution, many of the most prominent and experienced political members of America’s society provided a framework on the future of the new country; they had in mind, because of the failures of the Articles of Confederation, a new kind of government where the national or Federal government would be the sovereign power, not the states. Because of the increased power of the national government over the individual states, many Americans feared it would hinder their ability to exercise their individual freedoms. Assuring the people, both Alexander Hamilton and James Madison insisted the new government under the constitution was “an expression of freedom, not its enemy,” declaring “the Constitution made political tyranny almost impossible.” (Foner, pg. 227) The checks and balances introduced under the new and more powerful national government would not allow the tyranny caused by a king under the Parliament system in Britain. They insisted that in order achieve a greater amount of freedom, a national government was needed to avoid the civil unrest during the system under the Articles of Confederation. Claiming that the new national government would be a “perfect balance between liberty and power,” it would avoid the disruption that liberty [civil unrest] and power [king’s abuse of power in England] caused. The “lackluster leadership” of the critics of the new constitution claimed that a large land area such as America could not work for such a diverse nation.