Chapter 10 is basically about how the country’s development prompted the Civil War. In this chapter, we learned about political parties changing, different presidential elections, and all the major events leading up to the Civil War.
In section 1, the focus was on how Congress tried to rectify the conflict between the North and South. As people settled in the western lands, tensions rose about what to do about slavery. David Wilmot proposed a law that said slavery of any kind would not exist in the lands won from the Mexican-American War. This became known as the Wilmot Proviso. This did not pass because the Senate voted it down. During this time period, the northern part of the country developed very different views of the southern part of the country. Northerners felt that slavery was while Southerners felt that slavery was necessary for the plantation lifestyle they lived. During the election of 1848, these feelings came out in strong ways. The debate on whether or not they should limit the expansion of slavery caused both the Democratic and Whig party to divide into factions and even pro payed the start of a new political party: the Free-Soil Party. This party was led by candidate Martin Van Buren and their main goal was to keep slavery from expanding into western territories. They also wanted to “resist aggressions of the slave power” and have a “national platform or freedom.” The Democrats nominated Lewis Cass, Governor for Michigan. He refuted the Wilmot Proviso but supported popular sovereignty. The Whigs nominated a war hero from the Mexican-American war, Zach Taylor. Though Taylor was not known to share very many of his political opinions, he was a slave and plantation owner in Louisiana so many concluded he supported the use of slavery. In the end of the election, Zach Taylor took home the presidential title. The tensions continued to arise, but the Compromise of 1850 helped by pushing the North and South to reach an agreement. The Compromise of 1850 had five parts: First Congress would admit California as a free state. Second, the territories of New Mexico and Utah would decided to be a free or solve state by popular sovereignty. Third, the slave trade (not slavery only trade) would end in Washington D.C. Fourth, Congress would pass a strict new fugitive slave law and last, Texas would give up its claims to New Mexico in return for $10 million. This section also discusses the three most important senators: Henry Clay who was a Republican, John C. Calhoun who was a Democrat and Daniel Webster who was part of the Whig party. Finally, the section discusses the Fugitive Slave Law and later the Fugitive Slave Act, which required people to catch a return any runaway slaves they could find to their owners.
In section 2, the focus was on escalating tensions and violence. Northerners hated the Fugitive Slave Act, so many states passed personal liberty laws, which were Other forms of protest broke out, like what happened at Christiana, Pennsylvania. A heavily armed group of African Americans got together at a farmhouse there to protect many runaway slaves from their master in Maryland who had brought a federal official to capture and reclaim them. In the midst of all the chaos, the master was killed and though over 30 people were tried, none were convicted of murder. This was only one of the situations in which slab es tried to escape. Northern abolitionists and free slaves began a risky network to lead enslaved people from captivity known as the Underground Railroad. One of the most famous conductors of the Underground Railroad was Harriet Tubman. She made over two dozen trips to help slaves escape and rescued hundreds including her parents. A very important novel at this time was “Uncle Tom’s Cabin”, written by Harriet Beecher Stowe . And finally, the main topic discussed during this section was the Kansas-Nebraska Act. This act divided Nebraska and Kansas in which Kansas would be a slave state and Nebraska a free state. Many northerners, angered by this, pointed out that this act basically nullified the Missouri Compromise by letting slavery expand to territories that had been free for more than 30 years. Although this act was meant to unite the nation, it ended up causing more division. The division between groups sparked some violent conflict in Kansas. Each group wanted to outnumber the other so that their group could have more votes when the time came to vote. Their persistent competition to settle the score by popular sovereignty ended with violent outbreaks in Kansas in 1856. These violent outbreaks however were not limited to Kansas. The debate over slavery grew so deep, it sparked a Civil War. At the same time, Congress had its own violent outbreak with the members of Congress who began to bring weapons and arms to work. One example of the violent outbreaks in the Senate was When Representative Preston Brooks beat Senator Sumner With a cane used to train dogs because of a comment he had made insulting senator Andrew Butler
Section 3 discusses the political upheaval going on in the country. The political scene was shifting a lot in the 1840’s. The Whig party was becoming almost nonexistent because they didn’t know what side of the crisi they should be on: the side that supports slavery or the side against slavery. In the mid-1800’s a new party formed: the “Know-Nothings” who later became known as the American party. They were called the “Know-Nothings” because members responded “I know nothing” when asked about their secret organization. They were an anti-immigration movement that hid from the public eye but later came out, as I mentioned earlier, the American party. This party dissolved for the same reason that the Whig party did: division between the decision on slavery. As these parties broke apart, the anti-slavery movement rose to create a new party: the Republican party. Not supporting slavery was the center to the Republican Party. The group grew rapidly in the North and challenged the older, established parties.
The Supreme Court caused outrage by denying Dred Scott his freedom in the Dred Scott v. Sandford case. Scott argued that since his master had moved him to the free state of Illinois and Wisconsin Territory he should be free since the Missouri Compromise outlawed slavery in that region. Abraham Lincoln spoke out against this case in his speeches against Stephen Douglas. In 1858, Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas put together a series of debates during their run for a seat in the senate. Many referred to the debates as “Honest Abe” vs. “The Little Giant”. These debates consisted of what they thought should be done with the slavery issue and promising statements for the senate. Stephen Douglas that popular sovereignty was the best way for the states to decide for themselves what to be done with slavery and Abraham Lincoln thought that slavery should be removed as a whole. The hundreds of people that come to see these debates were always amused by the fact that such a short outspoken man like Stephen Douglas would go up with someone twice his size (literally). Another major point of this section was about John Brown and Harpers Ferry. John Brown was more of a radical abolitionist prepared to fight and die for his cause. He claimed to be an angel of God and needed to be avenged for the evil of slavery. He also seemed to think that violence was the only and best way to reach his goal. Brown made a plan to attack and in 1859 he and the men he had recruited headed for the federal arsenal in Harpers Ferry, Virginia. He thought he had thought of everything but there were some things he missed and overlooked. In the end he the members of the rebellion were met at the arsenal with local residents surrounding them. Though his intentions may have been for the right reasons, the fact that he thought violence was the best option sounds more terroristic to me.
Section 4 begins by focusing on the election of 1860. In the election of 1860 there four main candidates. For the Democratic Party there were two different candidates: The first candidate was John Breckinridge who was a southern democrat from Kentucky that believed the federal government must protect slavery. The second democratic candidate was Stephen Douglas who was a northern democrat from Illinois who believed popular sovereignty was the best way to resolve the issue of slavery in the states. The Republican candidate was Abraham Lincoln who was a Republican from Illinois that believed slavery must not be allowed in the territories. The last candidate was John Bell who was a constitutional unionist from Tennessee who believed the federal government should support slavery and also defend the union. Though there was a lot of controversy in the South, Abraham Lincoln won the election. As a result of this election, the South began to rebel. South Carolina was the first state to secede the Union because many southerners believed that because Lincoln had won, they no longer had a voice in America. In the following weeks six more states in the south seceded. The seceding states called themselves the Confederate States of America and along with that they created their own constitution that guaranteed the protection of slavery. Elected as their president was former Mississippi senator, Jefferson Davis. Lincoln tried to unite the country, but his efforts failed. The war began with Fort Sumter. Some people from South Carolina felt that Lincoln’s motives were suspicious. As a result, they ordered Fort Sumter to surrender to the Confederacy. When they denied to do so, the Confederates fired on the fort. While the Union troops ran out of ammunition, the commander was forced to surrender the fort. When news reached the North they were outraged. In response Lincoln recruited 75,000 volunteers to fight against the Confederacy. The South responded back with just as much anger and four more states seceded to the Confederacy: Virginia, Arkansas, Tennessee and North Carolina. Both the North and the South thought that this war would be won in days or maybe weeks so they didn’t really train their volunteers before sending them into battle. Little did the know, this war would be one of the most historical in American history.