1861: A Failure of Compromise 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. One of the main reasons for the failure of compromise in 1861 was the gradual progression of power imbalance happening between the North and South. Compromises between the two sides had focused on keeping their political powers equal in force and strength, and for the most part the United States remained successful in keeping the two sides evenly matched (Carole E. Scott). Unfortunately this political stalemate between North and South would not last for long. Peter Knupfer describes compromise as a process dependent on the balance of self interest between two opposing forces (9). By 1861 it was no longer in the self... ... middle of paper ... ...the two sides; it was no longer in the South’s self interest to make a compromise. The second factor being that the American people had grown disillusioned with compromises made in the past (e.g. the 1850 compromise and the Kansas-Nebraska act. The third and final factor which contributed to the United States’ inability to compromise, was that the two different regions had grown so divided economically, culturally, and politically; that it made it seemingly impossible for any sort of compromise or agreement to be made. For these three reasons, a compromise was never made and America went to war. It is doubtful however, that it would have happened any other way. The compromises were just placating the inevitable, and one side needed to come out on top. It was only a matter of time before compromises just would not be enough to solve one of America’s greatest arguments.
As the Reconstruction Era ended, the United States became the up and coming world power. The Spanish-American war was in full swing, and the First World War was well on its way. As a result of the open-door policy, England, Germany, France, Russia, and eventually Japan experienced rapid industrial growth; the United States decided to pursue a foreign policy because of both self- interest and idealism. According to the documents, Economic self- interest, rather than idealism was more significant in driving American foreign policy from 1895 to 1920 because the United States wanted to protect their foreign trade, property and their access to recourses. While the documents also show that Nationalistic thought (idealism) was also crucial in driving American foreign policy, economic Self- interest prevailed.
Missouri was a slave state, while Maine was a free state. This shows sectionalism as this thought on slavery distinctly separates the nation into Southern beliefs and Northern beliefs. This compromise shows the gap between the north and south. It has led to many devastating losses throughout history, yet on the other side it has “resolved” conflict when the conflict was too troublesome to talk through.
Each author agreed that the battles were not the only reason for the fall and death of the Confederacy. While battles were being fought on the battlefields, the home fronts were had their own battles to fight. McPherson discusses what he calls as the “internal conflict” thesis, which blames the uneasiness among the southerners. The government was being blamed. Southerners were opposing conscription, taxes, and habeus corpus. McPherson points out that these could not have been reasons for the loss. The same thing was happening in the North. Therefore this internal conflict with the home front government does not have a plausible role in why the South lost the war. If the North was fighting the same type of opposition at home, then shouldn’t the war have ended in a stalemate? Also, the non-slaveholding whites and the slaves were feeling alienated. Rich slaveholders who wanted to keep slave labor alive were fighting the war. The two alienated groups were fighting a war on the wrong side. The non-slaveholders opposed sec...
Crisis struck in 1820, when the North/South balance in the Senate was threatened by the application of Missouri to join the Union as a slave state. Southerners, aware of their numerical inferiority in the House of Representatives, were keen to maintain their political sway, in the Senate. The North feared that if Southerners were to take control of the Senate, political deadlock would ensue. Compromise was found in 1820 when Maine applied to join as a free state, maintaining the balance.
Throughout Europe in the fifteenth, sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries, nations were filled with poor and less fortunate individuals. While the nobles of countries such as France and England ruled their lands, many forgot about the underprivileged that roamed the city streets begging for alms. As a result, the opinions towards these lower class people were very differentiated. However, three main opinions stood out. All in all, the views of the poor in fifteenth – eighteenth century Europe included those who believed individuals should help the poor because it is the right thing to do, those who believed individuals should help the poor for God, and those who believed the poor were just idlers
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.
Near the end of the Antebellum Era, tensions and sectionalism increased as the states argued over what was constitutional. The South had later seceded from the United States and had become the Confederacy of America while the North had remained as the Union. The South had fully supported states’ rights while the north had strongly disapproved it. However, westward expansion, southern anger with the abolitionists, and the secession of the South that had destroyed the feeling of unity in the country because of the disagreement over slavery had been the main factors to the cause of the Civil War. Therefore, since slavery was the primary reason for the discontent in the country, it had been the primary cause of the Civil War.
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
Tensions between the North and South had grown steadily since the anti slavery movement in 1830. Several compromises between the North and South regarding slavery had been passed such as the Nebraska-Kansas and the Missouri act; but this did little to relieve the strain. The election of President Lincoln in 1861 proved to be the boiling point for the South, and secession followed. This eventually sparked the civil war; which was viewed differently by the North and the South. The Northern goal was to keep the Union intact while the Southern goal was to separate from the Union. Southern leaders gave convincing arguments to justify secession. Exploring documents from South Carolina’s secession ordinance and a speech from the Georgia assembly speech will explain how the Southern leaders justify the secession from the United States.
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.
The South did not want to lose slavery and wanted future territories to have slavery. Compromise is impossible to achieve. Going back to the quote, "The 1850's was a time of attempted compromise when compromise was no longer possible. " During the 1850's compromise was attempted by both the North and South and failed. It failed because both sides wanted different things, and this made compromise impossible.
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.
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.
The north made a compromise which was a wrong decision and was the start to something worse that was what to come. Also the corruption of the government in the north caused the reconstruction to fall apart. (Background Essay paragraph 1) “1876 was an exciting year for America” “So it is great irony of history that the election of 1876 officially crushed the american dream.” The Compromise of 1877 was a compromise that gave both sides what they assumed they wanted. (Background Essay, Paragraph 4) The Compromise was introduced because of the presidential election. The north wanted there president and the south wanted theirs. The Republican candidate Rutherford B. Hayes against the Democratic Candidate Samuel J. Tilden. So the north wanted to make a compromise and they wanted to give the north and the south what they wanted. The north got their president and the south got the union troops out of the south. (Background Essay Paragraph 5) When Hayes took union troops from the south he was ending the
...f wearing down the north's patience. The south's idea of northerns as "city slickers" who did not know how to ride or shoot was wrong. Many of the men who formed the Union forces came from rural backgrounds and were just as familiar with riding and shooting as their southern enemies. Finally, the south's confidence in its ability to fund through sales of export crops such as cotton did not take into consideration the northern blockade. France and Britain were not willing to become involved in a military conflict for the sake of something they had already stockpiled. The help the south had received from France and Britain turned out to be a lot less than they expected. In conclusion, while all the south's reasons for confidence were based on reality, they were too hopeful. The south's commitment to a cause was probably what caused their blindness to reality.