Sectionalism Essay, Research Paper

Sectionalism –>Most Americans, when they think of the reasons for the Civil war, will correctly name slavery as a major issue dividing the north from the South. However, what may not be known is the influence of a number of issues of the time such as territorial expansion and the political definitions meant to be embedded within the Constitution. This 5 page paper explores the issues of sectionalism before and after the Civil War. Bibliography lists 4 sources. .All men are created equal, x but were they treated equally during the pre-civil war period? Since the beginning of the colonization of America, blacks were considered properties and were never given any rights white men had. Even the Founding Fathers decided not to touch the slavery issue, wishing that it will die out eventually. However, after the Constitution officially legalized slavery, this issue became more complex. As a result of the problems of slavery, there was a growing sectionalism between the North (free states) and the South (slave states). The first example of sectionalism caused by the slavery issue is the Missouri Compromise of 1820. It divided the land acquired in the Louisiana Purchase along the 36 30 line. All territories north of this line forbid slavery except for Missouri. To balance this out, Maine was admitted as a free state. This compromise was an example of a strict sectionalism caused because of the balancing of the numbers of free and slave states. The Compromise of 1850 also arose sectionalism by stating that California would be admitted as a free state. Of course the Southerners weren t happy with this so Henry Clay proposed several resolutions. All the other territories acquired from Mexico would not have any restrictions on slavery and slavery in the Districts of Colombia was prohibited with the consent of the residents. The resolution also stated that the Congress had no power to interfere with the interstate slave trade. Most importantly, a more effective Fugitive Slave Act was to be adopted. As a result, the Compromise of 1850 was passed and led a further step in separating the free states from the slave states. Another bill that divided up a territory because of the different stance on the slavery issue was the Kansas-Nebraska Bill of 1854. The Southerners didn t support this bill from the start. As a result, Douglas allowed .popular sovereignty x in the territories of the Louisiana Purchase. This bill also admitted Nebraska as a free state and Kansas as a slave state. The Democratic party and the antislavery Whigs were against this bill because it ignored the Missouri Compromise of 1820. The Constitutionality of the Missouri Compromise was also questioned in the Dred Scott Decision. These issues were all presented because of the different stances the Northerners and the Southerners took in regards to slavery. In conclusion, the issue of slavery was the major cause of the growing sectionalism in the pre-civil war US. Many bills and compromises were made to satisfy the different opinions of the free and slave states. This caused a gradual increase in sectionalism in the US. As a result, the government was unable to become stable and reliable. The different opinions of slavery have to diminish in order for sectionalism to disappear and stabilize the country. Causes of the American Civil War The South, which was known as the Confederate States of America, seceded from the North, which was also known as the Union, for many different reasons. The reason they wanted to succeed was because there was four decades of great sectional conflict between the two. Between the North and South there were deep economic, social, and political differences. The South wanted to become an independent nation. There were many reasons why the South wanted to succeed but the main reason had to do with the North s view on slavery. All of this was basicallya different interpretation of the United States Constitution on both sides. In the end all of these disagreements on both sides led to the Civil War, in which the North won. There were a few reasons other then the slavery issue, that the South disagreed on and that persuaded them to succeed from the Union. Basically the North favored a loose interpretation of the UnitedStates Constitution. They wanted to grant the federal government increased powers. The South wanted to reserve all undefined powers to the individual states. The North also wanted internal improvements sponsored by the federal government. This was more roads, railroads, and canals. The South, on the other hand, did not want these projects to be done at all. Also the North wanted to develop a tariff. With a high tariff, it protected the Northern manufacturer. It was bad for the South because a high tariff would not let the south trade its cotton for foreign goods. The North also wanted a good banking and currency system and federal subsidies for shipping and internal improvements. The South felt these were discriminatory and that they favored Northern commercial interests. Now the main reason for the South s secession was the Slavery issue. Basically the South wanted and needed it and the North did not want it at all. The South was going to do anything they could to keep it. This was the issue that overshadowed all others. At this time the labor force in the South had about 4 million slaves. These slaves were very valuable to the slaveholding planter class. They were a huge investment to Southerners and if taken away, could mean massivelosses to everyone. Slaves were used in the South as helpers in the fields in the cultivation of tobacco, rice, and indigo, as well as many other jobs. The South especially needed more slaves at this time because they were now growing more cotton then ever because of the invention of the cotton gin. Cotton production with slaves jumped from 178,000 bales in 1810 to over 3,841,000 bales in 1860. Within that time period of 50 years the number of slaves also rose from about 1,190,000 to over 4,000,000. The plantation owners in the Southcould not understand why the North wanted slavery abolished that bad.Southerners compared it with the wage-slave system of the North. They said that the slaves were better cared for then the free factory workers in the North. Southerners said that slaveowners provided shelter, food, care, and regulation for a race unable to compete in the modern world without proper training. Many Southern preachers proclaimed that slavery was sanctioned in the Bible. But after the American Revolution slavery really died it the North, just as it was becoming more popular in the South. By the time of 1804 seven of the northern most states had abolished slavery. During this time a surgeof democratic reform swept the North and West. There were demands for political equality and economic and social advances. The Northerners goals were free public education, better salaries and working conditions for workers, rights for women, and better treatment for criminals. The South felt these views were not important. All ofthese views eventually led to an attack on the slavery system in the South, and showed opposition to its spread into whatever new territories that were acquired. Northerners said that slavery revokedthe human right of being a free person. Now with all these views the North set out on its quest for the complete abolition of slavery. When new territories became available in the West the South wanted to expand and use slavery in the newly acquired territories. But the North opposed to this and wanted to stop the extension of slavery into new territories. The North wanted to limit the number of slave states in the Union. But many Southerners felt that a government dominated by free states could endanger existing slaveholdings. The South wanted to protect their states rights. The first evidence of the North s actions came in 1819 when Missouri asked to be admitted to the Union as a slave state. After months of discussion Congress passed the Missouri Compromise of 1820. This compromise was legislative measures that regulated the extension of slavery in the United States for three decades. Now the balance of 11 free states and 11 slave states was in trouble. Maine also applied for statehood in 1819, in which it was admitted as a free state. To please the South, slavery would be prohibited forever from Louisiana Purchase territories north of 36. 30′. Southern extremists opposed any limit on the extension of slavery, but settled for now. Missouri and Maine were to enter statehood simultaneously to preserve sectional equality in the Senate. For almost a generation this Compromise seemed to settle the conflict between the North and South. But in 1848 the Union acquired a huge piece of territory from Mexico. This opened new opportunities for the spread of slavery for Southerners. But the distribution of these lands in small lots speeded the development of this section, but it was disliked in the South because it aided the free farmer than the slaveholding plantation owner. So now Congress passed the CompromiseMeasures of 1850 during August of 1850. It dealt mainly with the question of whether slavery was to be allowed or prohibited in the regions acquired from Mexico as a result of the Mexican War. This compromise allowed abolition of the slave trade in the District of Columbia and admission of California as a free state. Another part of the compromise was the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850, which provided for the return of runaway slaves to their masters. But many free states in the Union passed personal liberty laws in an effort to help the slaves escape. Many Northerners set up underground railroads where the runaway slaves could hide and get food and be directed to Canada for freedom. This angered many Southerners. This compromise also said that the territory east of California given to the United States by Mexico was divided into the territories of New Mexico and Utah, and they were opened to settlement by both slaveholders and antislavery settlers. This measure outdated the Missouri Compromise of 1820. All these compromise measures resulted in a gradual intensification of the hostility between the slave and free states. Again another law waspassed in 1854. It was called the Kansas-Nebraska Act. It authorized the creation of Kansas and Nebraska, west of Missouri and Iowa and divided by the 40th parallel. It repealed the Missouri Compromise of 1820 that had prohibited slavery in the territories north of 36. 30′, and stated that the inhabitants of the territories should decide for themselves the legality of slaveholding. This act was sponsored by the Democratic senator Stephen A. Douglas of Illinois. He hoped to simplify construction of a transcontinental railroad through thesestates rather than through the southern part of the country. The removal of the restriction on the expansion of slavery ensured southern support for the bill, which was signed into law by President Franklin Pierce on May 30, 1854. This act split the Democratic party and destroyed the Whig party also. The northern Whigs joined antislavery Democrats to form the Republican party in July 1854. A conflict developed in Kansas between proslavery settlers fromMissouri and antislavery newcomers who began to move into the territory from the northeastern states. This was what known as “Bleeding Kansas.” There were also many people in the North known as abolitionist s who made the South look very bad. The abolitionists played a major role in shaping the views of many Northerners. These people were fully against slavery and its expansion and most of the time took matters into their own hands to get their point across.Some of the most famous abolitionists were William Lloyd Garrison of Boston, Wendell Phillips, who in 1836 gave up his law practice because he couldn t support the United States Constitution, James G. Birney of Ohio who gathered all anti-slavery forces into one unit called the Liberty Party and Frederick Douglass, who was an escaped slave who became a black editor. The last main conflict that led to succession was during the presidential election of 1860. The newly formed Republican party nominated Abraham Lincoln on principles that opposed the further expansion of slavery. Now with Lincoln being elected the South really felt that expansionism was being threatened, and because expansionwas vital to the survival of slavery they also felt their way of life was being threatened. Because slavery was such a important part of Southern society, the South felt that they could not survive without it. Now they felt there was nothing more they could do. They were convinced that they should make a bid for independence by succeeding rather then face political encirclement. It was all described when a Southern man said “We have at last reached that point in our history when it is necessary for the South to withdraw from the Union. This has not been our seeking…but we are bound to accept it or self-preservation.” This was officially the end and now the South wanted to succeed. Lincoln said that succession was illegal and said that he intended to maintain federal possessions in the South. Southerners hoped the threat of succession would force acceptance of Southern demands, but it did not. Finally the day came on Dec. 20, 1860 when South Carolina adopted an ordinance of succession. The other states to follow and succeed were: Mississippi on Jan 9, 1861, Florida on January 10, Alabama on Jan 11, Georgia on January 19, Louisiana on January 26, and Texas on February 1. On February 4 delegates from all these states met in Montgomery, Alabama where they drafted a constitution for the Confederate States of America. This outraged the North and what was led to the Civil War. Many different efforts were made to save the Union and prevent a war. James Buchanan believed the Constitution did not allow the North to take any action against the South. An effort was made on February4th by the Virginia Legislature who called a conference of the states at Washington D.C. Representatives were sent from 7 slave and 14 free states. An amendment was passed saying Congress could never interfere with slavery in the states. But it was not ratified by the necessary number of states and was forgotten when the Civil War began. The existence of slavery was the central element of the conflict between the North and South. Other problems existed that led to 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. But 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 secededfrom the Union and there was really no other way to avoid succession because the North and South had totally opposing views.

Sectionalism Throughout the early 1800’s the country was split in many areas over many issues. Some of the more severe clashes between differing groups resulting from such issues as slavery, expansion, and internal improvement. With all of these controversial topics to worry about along with the vast diversity in the nation, caused separation and tensions throughout the country. The most prominent of the previous topics was slavery. This was an issue in the days of the bible and continues to be an issue in the middle 1800’s. The divisions in the country brought about by slavery seem to be categorized into two main groups, abolitionists, and slaveholders. These two groups also were divided geographically for the most part due to the South’s need of slaves for cheap, and reliable man power, and the North, as it was not an agriculturally based economy and needed little in the way of unskilled laborers. It was very easy for the North to bash the South’s slavery because their economy did not depend upon slavery. They had no slaves, no need for slaves, and saw slavery as inhumane and unlawful. The south, however, depended upon slavery as a basis of production, and the only way to operate large farms at the time, primarily being the large cotton plantations of the south. Several people tried to resolve the issue of slavery with compromises and bills that set clear rules and laws to appeal to both sides. The most prominent being the Missouri compromise. This document set the standard for slavery at the time. It also managed to further divide the country into two opposing groups geographically separated by the 36 degree 30 minute line. The bill clearly stated that no states above the proposed line should have slavery, with exception to those already in existence. This meant that all new tates being brought into the country from the west had a choice to have slavery if and only if they lay below the line. Obviously, the south did not really like the idea, as it allowed the northern non-slave states to outnumber the southern slave states in the south as far as representation in the government was concerned. Another part of the slavery controversy was the moral issue and weather or not it was inhumane, and an injustice to the Negro. I don’t see how the North cared about the southern salve, because they failed to recognize slaves as people, and much less as citizens. So, that raises the question of how you could treat another human as if they were non-human, but still complain about their enslavement by other people for the benefit of your own country. Two pieces where this argument is seen are “Appeal to the women of the south” and “Slavery as it is.” These two articles discuss slavery in the light that it is wrong, and should be abolished. They completely see it from the standpoint of Christianity, and do not see it as accepted by the Bible. In “Appeal to the women of the South,” many quotes are used directly from the Bible citing specific examples of slavery as being wrong and not accepted. The next area of national division was expansion and the issues pertaining there to. The nation was a young one, with a rapidly growing population, and great ideas of world supremacy. People s views were basically divided into two groups, the expansionists, and the non-expansionists. These two groups were not as geographically separated as the North and the South of the slavery issue, but nonetheless were partially divided by the Mason-Dixon line. When people tried to rally for interaction in the war of 1812, they campaigned with the idea of newfound land, and how our country could expand. As people thought about the prospects of war, and acquisition of new land, they found the struggles of war, along with the fact that our country was young and relatively weak, not very promising. There was not a great need for land, and people were not very enthused about the war with England. Sure many people would have liked to stomp England in an easy war, which netted us complete disaffiliation with them, but we weren’t sure that we could really win at the time. The people with these ideas tended to be in the North, where cities were the norm, rather than small farming communities. The South, on the other hand, had a great deal to gain if we acquired more land. Since they were a predominantly a rural farming community, they saw a need for land, and felt strong about the nations abilities in the war. In the end, no land was won or lost, but the war was won. As for the final topic, internal improvement separated the country by political parties. These parties were the federalists and the republicans. They had very few geographical divisions, and views were mixed on both sides. We see the best example of this in the Maysville Road article. There was a dispute over the proposed road, and weather or not it should be built with federal money. The government claimed that the road was for the benefit of the mail, and allowed easy passage through the mountains of Kentucky. Many people did not like the idea still because it represented federal money being distributed in unequal amounts to different states, along with non-uniform benefits. This quickly set defined boundaries between the political parties of the time, and started a vast amount of tension between the two parties. By the end of the dispute, the opposed (Federalists) came out on top, and the road was never built, but it shows the first, strong, divergence in the populous of our nation since its conception. All of the above examples are all representative of issues of the time, which played a large roll in sectionalism, and the breakup of the United States. Over the long run, it is a miracle that, with the vast spectrum of people in the country, we have managed to stay together, through thick and thin, driven by one common force, “Freedom.”