I. Arousal The problematic Kansas-Nebraska Act, as any reader of American history knows, drove Abraham Lincoln back into politics in 1854. Speaking of himself in the third person for a campaign autobiography in 1860 he claimed to have been "aroused as he had never been before," by the success of Stephen A Douglas’s legislation. He admitted in that brief sketch that his pursuit of a private life practicing law in Springfield, Illinois had "almost superseded his thoughts of politics" as a career. The threat of the resuscitation of the institution of slavery from its excruciatingly slow and crooked “course of ultimate extinction” that the founders envisioned for it, however, profoundly disturbed his silent confidence in the efficacy of their wisdom. …show more content…
It can hardly be doubted that after 1854 Lincoln's public persona targeted the legal exclusion of the “peculiar institution” in the United States. The “open war” that he now detected against the principles of the founding--his "ancient religion"--and its experiment in self-government--of which he boldly declared more than fifteen years earlier had evolved from an "undecided experiment" to a "successful one"--provoked him to speak out more strongly than he thought necessary or wise at any time prior in his political career against the burgeoning influence of pro-slavery politicians who rejected the latter and threatened the former. To "save the principles of Jefferson from total overthrow"--the principles that Jefferson predicted would be "the Signal of arousing men” to action—Lincoln fought to reset the country's trajectory toward the founders' original intent, as he understood it, …show more content…
To tackle it successfully, a politician had to separate slavery from race as a political issue. The serious anti-slavery politician had to walk a thin tightrope between constitutionally acceptable emancipation and the inevitable progress toward racial equality that it obviously entailed. There was great support for the ending of slavery but little for any move toward the leveling of race in America. Few made a stand for such progress. They were considered most radical and dangerous. But abolitionists came in all forms. Sure there was Frederick Douglass, Horace Greely and William Lloyd Garrison, but many abolitionists sought an emancipation for blacks that did not include civil rights, citizenship or, indeed, even residence in the country. A stealthy politician seeking to bring about slavery’s end, for any reason, had to be sure not to upset the fear of racial equality that pervaded the body politic and informed public
The American Civil War not only proved to be the country’s deadliest war but also precipitated one of the greatest constitutional crises in the history of the United States. President Lincoln is revered by many Americans today as a man of great moral principle who was responsible for both preventing the Union’s dissolution as well as helping to trigger the movement to abolish slavery. In retrospect, modern historians find it difficult to question the legitimacy of Lincoln’s actions as President. A more precise review of President Lincoln’s actions during the Civil War, however, reveals that many, if not the majority, of his actions were far from legitimate on constitutional and legal grounds. Moreover, his true political motives reveal his
Disapproval, the Confederacy, and slavery were amongst the many crises Abraham Lincoln faced when addressing his First Inaugural speech (Lincoln, First Inaugural, p.37). Above all, Lincoln’s speech was stepping on the boundaries of the southern slave states. Once states began to secede, new territories formed and the disapproval of Lincoln grew. Despite Lincoln’s attempts of unifying the antislavery and confederate views, many whites refused to follow his untraditional beliefs. Lincoln encountered hostile and admirable emotions from the people of the Union and the Confederacy. However, despite his representation of the Union, not everyone agreed with his views.
Lincoln secondarily accused slavery for chaos in the United States. He concluded that there needed to be a “political religion” emphasizing laws in the US, including citizenship. Lincoln’s speech was one of the earliest speeches of its time to be published. The Lyceum Address was published in the Sangamon Journal. The speech helped to establish Lincoln’s reputation as an orator.
While northern Democratic senator Stephen Douglas introduced the bill purely to organize the western territory to build railroads in his home state of Illinois, the South grabbed at the chance to push their expansion agenda. Knowing that Douglas needed Southern Democrats in order to pass his bill, the senators would “no longer tolerate retention of the Missouri Compromise’s declaration that slavery must be ‘forever prohibited’ from Nebraska.” They needed to cancel this “retention” since slavery would not last trapped in the South. Douglas offered them the opportunity to demand a change. The growing number of slaves pressured the politicians to take this chance to better their chances for expansion, and therefore survival of
The Compromise of 1850 was the last compromise between Northern and Southern political factions before the civil war. Although Steven Douglass, the man instrumental in getting the bill to pass Congress, designed it to ease sectional tensions, it led the way for a series of political events that would change America’s history. The acceptance of popular sovereignty which was a key component of the 1850 Compromise open the interpretation of former compromises, specify the Missouri Compromise of 1820 which stated that all states over the 36-30 line would be considered free. Northern Democratic senator Steven Douglass took the acceptance of the Compromise of 1850 as an acceptance of popular sovereignty and applied it to his Kansas- Nebraska Act in a scheme to help build his transcontinental railroad. The introduction of the Kansas- Nebraska Act in 1854 was the start of the violent sectional conflicts that plague the union during the 1850s. Once the time of compromise ended in American politics the next step that sectional factions took was violence. Sectional tensions escalated so quickly into physical violence because Northerners and Southerners felt that each opposing group was not only attacking their financial institutions but social and culture institutions as well.
“The greatest measure of the 19th century was passed by corruption, aided and abetted by the purest man in the world.” This quote, by Thaddeus Stevens, served to announce the corruption and dismay found within the presidency of Lincoln, as he attempted to pass the infamous 13th amendment. Abraham Lincoln, the 16th president of the United States of America, set forth ideas that were unknown at the time. As a major opponent of slavery towards the end of his term, Lincoln voiced his plans to abolish slavery, along with ending the Civil War. Although these plans seemed far-fetched at the time, Lincoln used his power and popularity to achieve both goals, paving the way for equality throughout the States. Despite the fact that the Civil War began merely as a fight to preserve the union, Lincoln soon
Abraham Lincoln’s original views on slavery were formed through the way he was raised and the American customs of the period. Throughout Lincoln’s influential years, slavery was a recognized and a legal institution in the United States of America. Even though Lincoln began his career by declaring that he was “anti-slavery,” he was not likely to agree to instant emancipation. However, although Lincoln did not begin as a radical anti-slavery Republican, he eventually issued his Emancipation Proclamation, which freed all slaves and in his last speech, even recommended extending voting to blacks. Although Lincoln’s feeling about blacks and slavery was quite constant over time, the evidence found between his debate with Stephen A. Douglas and his Gettysburg Address, proves that his political position and actions towards slavery have changed profoundly.
The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War, by Thomas J. DiLorenzo completely shatters the illusion of the 16th President as the liberator of the slaves. DiLorenzo provides convincing evidence for Lincoln’s overt racism as expressed in his documented views on racial supremacy as stated in his desire to colonize all American blacks outside the United States (p. 4); Lincoln’s views were matched by the majority in the North who used such tools as state constitutional amendments to prohibit the emigration of black people into Northern states like Lincoln’s home of Illinois (p. 4); and that the Presidents war which killed 620, 000 Americans and destroyed 40% of the economy, was a singularly terrible, unjustified conflict given the proven success in the 19th century of the peaceful end to slavery through the policy of compensated emancipation (p. 4). DiLorenzo accordingly notes that, “Between 1800 and 1860, dozens of countries, including the entire British Empire, ended slavery peacefully; only in the United States was war involved (p. 4). DiLorenzo documents that history’s claims that the abolition of slavery as the leading motive behind the Union’s aggression against the South is untrue. He states that Lincoln’s motives were economic and political and in no way altruistic. Lincoln did oppose slavery, but his opposition did not stem from any moral motive. He wished to preserve white labor, and to avoid artificial inflation of Southern representation in Congress under the three-fifths clause of the Constitution, under which every five slaves counted as three free persons for the purpose of allotting number of congressional seats.
Lincoln was a very smart lawyer and politician. During his “House Divided” speech he asked the question, “Can we, as a nation, continue together permanently, forever, half slave, and half free?" When he first asked this question, America was slowly gaining the knowledge and realizing that as a nation, it could not possibly exist as half-slave and half-free. It was either one way or the other. “Slavery was unconstitutional and immoral, but not simply on a practical level.” (Greenfield, 2009) Slave states and free states had significantly different and incompatible interests. In 1858, when Lincoln made his “House Divided” speech, he made people think about this question with views if what the end result in America must be.
Lincoln, Abraham. “Restating Positions on Slavery: December 1860.” Simpson, Brooks D., Stephen W. Sears, and Aaron Sheehan-Dean 109-110.
Abraham Lincoln is perhaps one of the most interesting characters to have ever graced the American political arena and presidency. He is most noteworthy, obviously, for his role in saving the United States from its own destruction and the eradication of the vile Southern tradition of slavery. However, upon deeper inspection, one finds there was much more to Lincoln than his political achievements. Throughout his years as a politician, there's a noticeable shift in terms of his character, and political persona. He seems to go from ambitious and boisterous to being more solemn and reserved. Also, it should be noted that some remark that Lincoln was, quite ironically, both America’s most democratic and autocratic President to have ever held office. However, it seems that though there is abundant evidence for his democratic values, there are little to suggest his autocratic intentions. As though some lines revealing such intent can be found, many are also directly rebutted by powerful democratic rhetoric. All of this can be found in Lincoln’s four main speeches; “A House Divided Against Itself Cannot Stand”, his Inaugural Addresses and the Gettysburg Address. Basically, in order to properly analyze Lincoln it may be best to look at Lincoln’s personal and political changes within the terms of his antebellum and Civil War “personalities”, as well as to examine his democratic and autocratic leanings; all through scrutinizing Lincoln’s major speeches.
...ecause of so many sectional differences, each region of America had its own intended President, creating a situation in which the losers of the election would already be organized for revolt. However, given that the parties were what they were, President Lincoln could have proposed a quick but strong compromise, right after he won the election, which would keep the Southerners and other non-supporters satisfied with the new political situation. Unfortunately, slavery-issues had been brewing for far too long for this situation to have an easy way out.
Primarily, America’s opulence initiated with Lincoln’s determination to preserve and to strengthen the moral cause of the Union, starting off with focusing on abolishing slavery. Initially, his “paramount object in this struggle [was] to save the Union, and [was] not either to save or to destroy slavery.” The institute of slavery was a controversy in America for decades. Although his intentions were never to radically demand immediate freedom for 4 million black slaves, his Emancipation Proclamation, which was issued during his third year fighting the Civil War, finally conveyed the annihilation of slavery. What really caused Lincoln to reverse his original thoughts regarding the emancipation of slaves was a calling for “an act of justice.” He felt that God called upon him to free the slaves, similarly to how Moses felt when God spoke to him through the burning bush to liberate the Jewish slaves in Egypt. Moreover, slavery, the state of an individual having absolute power over another individual’s life and liberty, was finally recognized as an evil concept according to Lincoln. The purpose of the Emancipation Proclamation was not solely on freeing the slaves, bu...
In 1854 President Pierce signed the Kansas-Nebraska act, which formed the territories of Kansas and Nebraska.
During the Abraham Lincoln’s short time as president, he managed not only to save a nation deeply divided and at war with itself, but to solidify the United States of America as a nation dedicated to the progress of civil rights. Years after his death, he was awarded the title of ‘The Great Emancipator.’ In this paper, I will examine many different aspects of Lincoln’s presidency in order to come to a conclusion: whether this title bestowed unto Lincoln was deserved, or not. In order to fully understand Lincoln, it is necessary to understand the motives that drove this man to action. While some of his intentions may not have been for the welfare of slaves, but for the preservation of the Union, the actions still stand. Abraham Lincoln, though motivated by his devotion to his nation, made the first blows against the institution of slavery and rightfully earned his title of ‘The Great Emancipator.’