The turmoil between the North and South about slavery brought many issues to light. People from their respective regions would argue whether it was a moral institution and that no matter what, a decision on the topic had to be made that would bring the country to an agreement once and for all. This paper discusses the irrepressible conflict William H. Seward mentions, several politician’s different views on why they could or could not co-exist, and also discusses the possible war as a result. According to William Seward, slavery was able to exist because faster modes of transportation did not exist. “Internal commerce which daily becomes more intimate is rapidly bringing these states into a higher and more perfect social unity or consolidation.” …show more content…
The new territories and the discussion of whether they would be admitted to the Union free or slave-holding stirred up animosity. The Compromise of 1850 which offered stricter fugitive slave laws, admitted California as a free state, allowed slavery in Washington D.C., and allowed new territories to choose whether they wanted to be slave-holding or free was supposed to help ease tension between the North and South. Yet Southern states wanted more new territories to be slave-holders so the institution of it would continue to grow. They believed slavery was a way of life and as Larrabee said in his senate speech, “You cannot break apart this organization and this system that has intertwined itself into every social and political fiber of that great people who inhabit one-half of the Union.” (“There is a Conflict of Races”). The North felt like the south wanted to completely monopolize the new territories and make every one of them slaveholding. Northern states also held the belief that slavery was meant to be temporary and seemed morally wrong. The North and South each believed they were right in their beliefs, “Both remained convinced that the other would stop at nothing to achieve domination” (Fellman 65). An Illinois newspaper as quoted by Fellman regarding the South says, “She aspires to nothing short of absolute …show more content…
English believed that the North would never actually go through with the abolishment of slavery but it’s interesting that with that belief he still foreshadowed the fact that these two ideals could not live in mutual peace. One would overpower the other and grow while the latter would be diminished and eventually nonexistent. Seward, on the other hand, believed that an agreement seemed very unlikely and that a war was the likely result. He said in his irrepressible conflict speech, “every new state which is organized within our ever extending domain makes its first political act a choice of the one and the exclusion of the other, even at the cost of civil war, if necessary…”. (Seward). The people of the North and South each believed fiercely in their cause, one for a free people the other for life servitude. Neither group, based on the documents presented were willing to budge regarding their beliefs. They North wanted to abolish slavery completely and the South could not understand why they had to give up their way of life because the concept was so ingrained in them as a people. The two completely different ideals could not co-exist peacefully and therefore the eventual climax of this issue, the war, was an inevitable
The United States began to dissatisfy some of its citizens and so the concerns of sectionalism, or the split of the country began to arise. There was a continuous riff between the south and the north over a few issues, a major one being slavery. The south argued that the slaves were necessary to support the southern economy. According to document A, the south were angry that the north was creating taxes that hurt the southern economy, thus increasing the need for slavery since they had to make up for the expense of the taxes. The south felt that the north was able...
Ever since the formation of the colonies, differences stood in the way of a fundamental relationship between the north and the south. Despite these differences they were not the cause of the problems. In the 1820’s, the growth between territories and regions were increasing. This expansion went too far causing it to become a worldwide crisis. More chaos arouse since the north and the south did not agree on anything. The north strongly disagreed with the expansion of slavery, while south agreed to expand slavery throughout new territories and regions. The north's decision was based on factors such as political and economical threat instead of a moral threat, as it was depicted in the Missouri Compromise. However, the Compromise of 1850 , showed a more argument towards the morality threat, making it more united than ever.
Throughout the period of Antebellum there were many compromises made regarding slavery: The ⅗ compromise in 1787, the Missouri Compromise in 1820, the Tariff of 1833, and finally the compromise. With so many agreements made between the North and the South, why was america not able to make a compromise in 1861 when the secession crisis was happening? What happened between 1787 to 1861 causing the United States to change from a country of compromising opponents to a country of fighting enemies? The answer answer is not so simple.There are a myriad of factors which resulted in the ultimate failure of compromise, but the most important ones are as follows: The imbalance of power between the North and South made it incapable for the two sides to make a compromise that would be in the southerners own self interest, disillusionment with the nature of compromisation made neither the North nor the South want to work it out, and finally the growing divide between the two regions, along with clashing political beliefs caused an animosity between them that could not be reconciled by mere compromise.
The North and South in the years 1800 to 1860 were divided into two different territory which showed their different morale and lifestyle. Both factions conflicting ideas towards the issues affecting the nation. The compromise was made impossible by 1860 due to disagreement over states' rights, intense growth in sectionalism and dispute over the morals of slavery. During the time, the north underwent major social, industrial, and economic changes known as the Antebellum Period. The industrial economy took place in the North while the cotton kingdom took place in the South. The southern states wanted to expand slavery to other countries, while the northern states wanted to limit slavery to the South. In the Election of 1860 when Lincoln was elected, he believed slavery was wrong and made efforts to hold the Union together, Attempts such as the Missouri Compromise of 1820 and the Great Compromise of 1850 to bring reconciliation the North and South were made which led the Tariff/Nullification Controversy. In the early 1800s, the South and North faction made attempts to compromise but f...
The existence of slavery was the central element of the conflict of the north and south. Other problems existed that led to this succession but none were as big as the slavery issue. The only way to avoid the war was to abolish slavery, but this was not able to be done because slavery is what kept the south running. When the south seceded it was said by Abraham Lincoln that “ a house divided against itself cannot stand. I believe this government cannot endure permanently half slave and half free.” Because slavery formed two opposing societies and slavery could never be abolished, the civil war was inevitable. These were all the reasons why the south seceded from the union, this succession was eminent and there was no plausible way to avoid it.
In the years paving the way to the Civil War, both north and south were disagreeable with one another, creating the three “triggering” reasons for the war: the fanaticism on the slavery issue, the Kansas-Nebraska Act, and the separation of the Democratic Party. North being against the bondage of individuals and the South being for it, there was no real way to evade the clash. For the south slavery was a form of obtaining a living, without subjugation the economy might drop majorly if not disappear. In the North there were significant ethical issues with the issue of subjugation. Amazing measures to keep and dispose of subjugation were taken and there was never a genuine adjusted center for bargain. Despite the fact that there were a lot of seemingly insignificant issues, the fundamental thing that divided these two states was bondage and the flexibilities for it or against. With these significant extremes, for example, John Brown and Uncle Tom's Cabin, the south felt disdain towards the danger the Northerners were holding against their alleged flexibilities. The more hatred the South advanced, the more combative they were to anything the Northerners did. Northerners were irritated and it parted Democrats over the issue of bondage and made another Republican gathering, which included: Whigs, Free Soilers, Know Nothings and previous Democrats and brought about a split of segments and abbreviated the street to common war. Southerners loathed the insubordination of the north and started to address how they could stay with the Union.
...ecause they feared that Slavery would soon be completely abolished. These tensions eventually led to the civil war where the North won and slavery was ended although there were still slave like laws in place after.
As a central figure in the Republican Party and passionate advocate for anti-slavery, William Henry Seward characterized the conflict between the Southern Democrats and Northern Republicans as inevitable. Each political party had two radically different ideologies regarding the expansion of slavery into western territories. The Southern Democrats believed that slavery should exist in all western states while the Northern Republicans strongly disagreed. Similar to the ideologies of the Republicans, Seward believed that slavery was unjust and humans were granted the r...
What started as a war to prevent the South from seceding quickly turned into a war against slavery following President Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation. At the start of the Civil War, both Union and Confederate sides believed that they would had a quick and decisive victory. The North’s population and industry was vastly greater than the South’s, but the South had superior military leadership, a large white population that was united against invading Union armies and a hope that France or Britain would intervene on their behalf.
As previously mentioned, slavery was at the root of most tensions that arose between the North and the South, and the annexation of new land created much conflict concerning the status of slavery. Missouri Compromise dictated that the lands of the Louisiana Purchase north of the 36¢ª30¡¯ parallel were to be free of slavery. Democratic senator Douglas, introduced a bill in early 1854 which proposed the division of the Nebraska Territory into two units, Kansas and Nebraska, and the application of his idea of ¡°popular sovereignty¡± which would allow the territorial vote to decide the area¡¯s status concerning slavery. This proposal would, in effect, repeal the Missouri Compromise, which greatly angered abolitionists and Northerners. Douglas and Southern supporters won a congressional debate and shortly after, the bill was signed. With the passage of this bill, many conflicts arose. Much personal turmoil erupted in the territories with almost immediate tragic results in ¡°Bleeding Kansas.¡± Also, the bill resulted in a complete realignment of the major political parties: The Democrats lost influence in the North and were to become the regional proslavery party of the South, the Whig Party, which had opposed the Kansas-Nebraska Act, died in the South and was weakened in the North, and a new Republican Party ...
The presidential elections of 1860 was one of the nation’s most memorable one. The north and the south sections of country had a completely different vision of how they envision their home land. What made this worst was that their view was completely opposite of each other. The north, mostly republican supporters, want America to be free; free of slaves and free from bondages. While on the other hand, the south supporters, mostly democratic states, wanted slavery in the country, because this is what they earned their daily living and profit from.
From the mid-1840s, the struggle over slavery became central to American politics. Northerners who were committed to free soil, the idea that new, western territories should be reserved exclusively for free white settlers, clashed repeatedly with Southerners who insisted that any limitation on slavery's expansion was unconstitutional meddling with the Southern order and a grave affront to Southern honor. The slavery debate wasn't so much about the morality of the issue, but how it effected the nation politically and economically. This debate would later erupt into war. This furthers the South's commitment to Southern ways, especially slavery, in that they were willing to break from the Union, go to war, and die for the Southern cause.
The American Civil War was the bloodiest military conflict in American history leaving over 500 thousand dead and over 300 thousand wounded (Roark 543-543). One might ask, what caused such internal tension within the most powerful nation in the world? During the nineteenth century, America was an infant nation, but toppling the entire world with its social, political, and economic innovations. In addition, immigrants were migrating from their native land to live the American dream (Roark 405-407). Meanwhile, hundreds of thousand African slaves were being traded in the domestic slave trade throughout the American south. Separated from their family, living in inhumane conditions, and working countless hours for days straight, the issue of slavery was the core of the Civil War (Roark 493-494). The North’s growing dissent for slavery and the South’s dependence on slavery is the reason why the Civil War was an inevitable conflict. Throughout this essay we will discuss the issue of slavery, states’ rights, American expansion into western territories, economic differences and its effect on the inevitable Civil War.
The North and South had totally different cultures and economies making their opinions on certain topics vastly different, hence contributing to the start of the war. The Southern state’s economy relied on the use of slaves to run their plantation system that produced mainly tobacco and cotton. “The price of cotton, the South’s defining crop, had skyrocketed in the 1850s, and the value of slaves—who were, after all, property—rose commensurately” (The American Civil War). Therefore the South was thriving economically. “With different geographies and climates, the North and the South developed very different economies and lifestyles” (Biel 11). The Northern economy was based on free labor and was able to abolish slavery due to a great amount of immigration due to the potato famine in Ireland. This caused the North and South to be vastly different in moral beliefs. The North became enlightened on the horrors of slavery through literature such as Uncle Tom’s Cabin by Harriet Beecher Stowe which describe the mistreatment of slaves, this learning experience led to the abolit...
After thoroughly assessing past readings and additional research on the Civil War between the North and South, it was quite apparent that the war was inevitable. Opposed views on this would have probably argued that slavery was the only reason for the Civil War. Therefore suggesting it could have been avoided if a resolution was reached on the issue of slavery. Although there is accuracy in stating slavery led to the war, it wasn’t the only factor. Along with slavery, political issues with territorial expansion, there were also economic and social differences between North and South. These differences, being more than just one or two, gradually led to a war that was bound to happened one way or another.