preview

Secession Crisis Research Paper

Better Essays

The secession crisis was a radical movement in United States history that ultimately led to one of the most notorious conflicts within the country, the American Civil War. This crisis was a prelude to the war; it began when eleven states in the Lower and Upper South severed their ties with the Union. Twenty-one northern and border states retained the style and title of the United States, while the eleven slave states adopted the nomenclature of the Confederate States of America. As a result, even more conflict and chaos arose in the country and led to social and political unrest. Even though there were multiple reasons that led up to precipitating the secession crisis, slavery, westward expansion, bad leadership, and issues regarding states' …show more content…

For instance, the three presidents that ruled during this time were Millard Fillmore, Franklin Pierce, and James Buchanan. Firstly, Fillmore's presidency was characterized by appeasement; all he did was appease the southern slave interest time and time again with the Compromise of 1850 to the Fugitive Slave Act. Secondly, Pierce introduced the country to the concept of popular sovereignty and the Kansas Nebraska Act, which later led to Bleeding Kansas and opening the west to slavery. Lastly, Buchanan "…wanted to avoid the issue by conspiring with Chief Justice Taney on the Supreme Court to Appease the southern slave interest with the Dred Scott ruling open the west to slavery" (Civil War Talk). Thus, he kept quiet and simply watched the nation dissolve and did nothing to stop the south from seceding. It is clear that even though these three men were the most powerful men in the nation, they did nothing to further develop the country for the better. Instead, they all focused on appeasing the southern slave interest; they did not learn from history in that when there is a threat of secession, a line must be drawn. Additionally, there were many instances that hinted weak leadership in the nation. For instance, at the Constitutional Convention, leaders gave slave holders an argument that their stance was constitutional because slavery is mentioned in the constitution. The issue with this is that they totally ignored the North, which angered them and caused tension between the two sides. Moreover, The Missouri Compromise was also a sign of bad leadership. This is due to the fact that Congress remained impartial about slavery, and it brought controversy to the states as they had to decide which states would be free and which would be slave states. Another

Get Access