Slavery And The American Civil War

As stated above, the rapid spread of abolitionists in the northern states and the pro-slavery activism in the southern states, the United States of America was soon torn apart. In the year of 1820, an act known as the Missouri Compromise was passed, and slavery was banned from all newly created western territories. This passing caused a lot of tension in the southern states because they believed it was going to eventually diminish their industrial success. A few decades later in 1857, the United States Supreme Court made a new legal principle known as the Dred Scott Decision, which stated that African slaves (in the slave

Politically, slavery became one of those hot topic issues that politicians usually like to avoid speaking about because the country was divided into two different view points, pro-slavery and anti-slavery, and politicians wanted to be in everyone’s good graces to win come election time. However, when the argument came about weather or not newly inducted states could ban slavery or not, tensions rose in the government. This led to the Compromise of 1850, which allowed for stricter fugitive laws, but allowed California to be free, and New Mexico and Utah to make their decision based on popular sovereignty (the idea that the people of that state should choose). Politically, slavery left a whole mess of confusion for the new states. For example, in the Kansas- Nebraska act a railroad was to be built crossing over two new territories (Kansas and Nebraska) that allowed

Firstly, the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 established popular sovereignty which allowed the states to choose whether they were free or slave-holding (Doc 3). This led to a period of time known as Bleeding Kansas when tensions between antislavery Republicans and pro-slavery Democrats increased as border ruffians tipped the votes and violence ensued. Also, the Caning of Charles Sumner, when Northern Congressman Sumner was beat by Southern Congressman Preston Brooks, further intensified tensions (Doc 4). The event led Northerners to view Southerners as uncivilized and violent, further increasing the gap between the North and the South. Thirdly, the Dred Scott v. Sandford decision ruled that slaves were not citizens and it allowed slavery virtually everywhere (Doc 5). This angered Northerners extremely because slavery was banned in the North and most Northerners supported antislavery. It also effectively repealed the Kansas-Nebraska Act that allowed states to choose being slave-holding or free, further angering the North. Altogether these events were the reason sectionalism became such a large issue; they significantly increased mutual dislike between the North and the South and fragmented the

　　　　Slavery was at the root of the case of Dred Scott v. Sandford. Dred Scott sued his master to obtain freedom for himself and his family. His argument was that he had lived in a territory where slavery was illegal; therefore he should be considered a free man. Dred Scott was born a slave in Virginia around 1800. Scott and his family were slaves owned by Peter Blow and his family. He moved to St. Louis with them in 1830 and was sold to John Emerson, a military doctor. They went to Illinois and the Wisconsin territory where the Missouri Compromise of 1820 prohibited slavery. Dred Scott married and had two

In the 1780s, there was a question of whether slavery would be tolerable in new territories to threaten the Union. Throughout the decades, many compromises were made to avoid disunion. But the Constitution was not clear on this subject which created quite the discussion nationwide when raised in 1857 before the Supreme Court in the form of the Dred Scott case. The Dred Scott decision was an eye-opener to Northerners that believed slavery was acceptable as long as it stayed in the South. If the decision took away any power Congress once had to regulate slavery in new territories, slavery could quickly expand into much of the western United States. Realizing that once slavery expanded into those territories, it could quickly spread into the once-free states. Many Northerners remained silent on the issue, this very possibility was too scary to ignore. Northerners who had not previously been against the South and against slavery began to realize that if they did not stop slavery now, they might never again have the chance. The growing fear in the North helped further contributed to an ongoing dispute between the two sides which eventually lead to the Civil War. A couple years after Chief Justice Taney read Scott v. Sandford decision, half of the Union had seceded and the nation was engaged in civil war. However, because of the passions it created on both sides, Taney 's decision certainly quickly accelerated the start of conflict. Even in 1865, as the long and bloody

Throughout the 1800s in America, slavery was a controversy between the north and the south. A Slave was one who was the property of another human being under law and was forced to obey them. The North felt that slavery was unfair and inhumane, whereas in the South, they felt as though slavery was crucial to their success. African American slaves were not allowed many rights: they were not allowed to testify in court against a white person, could not receive an education, or even sign contracts. Due to the brutality they faced each day, many slaves escaped with hopes to find freedom. The Underground Railroad, a system utilized by many runaway slaves to help them escape from the South to Canada, played a large role in the downfall of slavery and eventual abolition in the United States following the Civil War.

While it is certainly simple to attribute the start of the Civil War solely on the issue of slavery, the issues run much deeper. Even though slavery is one of the underlying causes of the American Civil War, issues regarding political and economic differences are also to blame for the start of the war. However, many of these problems that caused the country to split had their roots in the problem of slavery.

Cotton was the king of the South. It was bringing in large amounts of money as the textile industry in the North grew. Slavery was vital to the economic well-being of the South, and when the North began to question the “peculiar institution” of the South the wall of civility between the two sectionalized areas began to crumble. Due to the growing issue of slavery in the 1850s, the United States of America was in a state of total disarray and turmoil. The tension that had always existed between the North and South over the matter of slavery was no longer ignorable. As the United States expanded to the West, the status of slavery in the new states erupted in a violence that could no longer be controlled by sectionalism. The peace treaties that had worked in the past became Band-Aids over stab wounds. Southern states began to leave the United States of America to form the Confederate States of America and war was declared as the South fired onto the forts of the North. The Civil War was caused directly by the issue of slavery; the fugitive slave act in the Compromise of 1850, Dred Scott v. Sandford, and Bleeding Kansas prove that slavery was the key factor in the eruption of the nation.

During the 1850s, slavery had become a topic of great discussion, especially when it came to the organization of new territories, and whether slavery should be allowed or prohibited in these new territories. Some argued that slavery was right, while others though it was not and should be ended, causing fear and anger between the free-states in the North and the Southern Slave states. This would lead to many problems for the nation. These problems not only created a division between the northern and southern states, it caused blood to be spilled and led to beginning of the American Civil War. Within these events, four significant ones created the spark needed to start the Civil War. These events were the Kansas Nebraska Act of 1854, Bleeding Kansas, Harper’s Ferry Raid, and the Secession of the South from the Union, which created a division between northern and southern states and made the American Civil War inevitable.

The question of slavery and the rights of states to decide on the matter for themselves completely controlled politics in the years prior to the Civil War. Laws were passed, such as the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, which made it so any slaves that escaped were to be sent back to their owners. Not only would these runaway slaves be punished severely, but anybody who aided them in escape would also be subject to harsh punishment. These desperate men, women, and children had no protection in the legal system and were left with no options in life other than escape. Many of these escapees had to watch friends and family be beaten, sold, or even killed and were expected to work just as hard, like nothing had happened. After losing everything, it

The American Civil War occurred between April 12, 1861, and May 9, 1865, and began due to the long-standing controversy of slavery in the country. Shortly after Abraham Lincoln took office, Confederates attacked Fort Sumter in South Carolina, and among the 34 U.S. states seven Southern slave states succeeded from the United States. More states seceded and the Confederacy grew up to eleven slave states. This split the country between the Union in the Northern states, and the Confederate States of America in the Southern states. One big disagreement many Americans have today is whether slaves rights was the cause of the Civil War or not. Charles B. Dew believes the Civil War was fought over slavery, using speeches and public letters of 41 white southerners who were commissioners and appealed to their audience the ideas of the preservation of slavery and white supremacy as his evidence. Gary W. Gallagher believes that the Civil War was not fought over slavery, and the main goal for Northerners was to preserve the Union, using letters of white Northern soldiers that do not show much concern for black people as his evidence. Frederick Douglass’s statement, “The cry of Free Men was raised, not for the extension of liberty to the black man, but for the protection of the liberty of the white” is valid because the Civil War was not fought for the equality of black people, African Americans were treated very poorly after the Civil War and the emancipation proclamation was passed for

Before the Civil War started, the North and the South argued on two main topics: slavery and state rights. In my opinion, it was because of slavery that state rights were argued. When Western territories were annexed from Mexico, they were admitted to the Union with the condition that that slavery be banned through the Wilmot Proviso (History.com). Because of this, slave states felt they were unfairly treated and outnumbered. The religious fervor of the Second Great Awakening also gave way to new ideology. Combined with the growing abolitionist sentiment, Northern states began taking action against Southern states. Because their rights as

Slavery was one of the biggest controversies in American history. The beliefs about slavery mostly varied from the North to the South but also varied from state to state and sometimes even among family members. All of these different views caused conflicts to arise in America and slavery soon became a huge contributing factor to the Civil War.

In pre-Civil War America, it was a common occurrence to witness Black families torn apart, sold off as property, and treated in hateful, vile manors in the name of a higher God. Many slave owners retained the firm belief that due to slavery being beneficial to them and the lack of clear-cut condemnation in scripture, it was a divine institution beneficial to both the slave and slave owner themselves. As a result, these ideals led to further enslavement and abuse, exploiting Blacks so that the slave owners could capitalize off of their work. Although many pro-slavery advocates assert that their actions are just through biblical claims, Douglass argues that Christianity has been twisted into an excuse by slaveholders to justify the institution of slavery.

With the increased sectional tensions left untouched after the Missouri Compromise, California wants in as a free state. Again, Henry Clay suggests an idea to keep from the occurrence of another uprising like the one after the Missouri Compromise. The Compromise of 1850 had something to offer for the North and the South. The Compromise would allow California to become a free state, as a benefit for the North. It would also ban the selling of slaves in Washington D.C., another benefit to the North. To make the south happy, it strengthened