Introduction
America, during the first half of the nineteenth century, had a growing divide between the North and South over the debate of the institution of slavery. The Constitution largely avoided the problem of slavery, and established the ⅗ compromise, which infuriated northerners because the South had disproportionate representation in the Electoral College. During the first half of the nineteenth century, the Northern economy took off. The South became a powerhouse of cotton production, and if slavery was to be given up, like many abolitionists proposed, the whole Southern economy would be in jeopardy. Southerners grew distrustful of the North, who they thought was going to take away their slaves, and they insisted that that a balance must be maintained in the Senate to hold Northerners back, which involved splitting new territories between slave states and free states. The Missouri Compromise of 1820 showed that America was able to compromise if it was evenly divided between slave and free states. Many compromises were put in place over the years, but they only temporarily solved the problem of slavery by maintaining a balance in the Senate. The Fugitive Slave Act, part of the Compromise of 1850, triggered intense confrontations between the North and South. Overall, people’s interests were restricted to their region, and many people looked on the other region with disdain. Sectionalism was the most important factor that led to America’s declining ability to compromise, although differing views of the powers of the federal government and growing radicalism were important causes of hostility.
First Body Paragraph
Topic Sentence: Growing radicalism in the abolitionist cause, such as Uncle Tom’s cabin and as well as the pro-slavery cause that stated the good will of slavery, was a major factor in America’s declining ability to compromise.
Evidence
-Uncle Tom’s Cabin, a novel documenting the horror and injustice of slavery, was a huge success and rallied Northerners behind the abolitionist cause. This caused the abolitionist movement to become more radical, demanding an immediate end to slavery, which only angered Southerners and forced them to rally behind their own cause.
–The American Anti Slavery Society Convention stated that slaves should instantly be set free and anyone who had a slave was a man stealer (Doc 2). This shows that the abolitionist cause had changed from gradual emancipation to immediate emancipation of all slaves, and shows disdain and contempt for Southern slave owners. Southerners were again angered by this and pushed back on them by claiming that slavery was a positive good. Both sides lingered further away from compromise.
Intended Audience: Northerners not sure about slavery and the Abolitionist cause, became more radical. This supports my thesis because they became more entrenched in the abolitionist cause and less likely to compromise.
-The Gag rule, passed in 1836, proclaims that no slavery bill of any kind can be considered in the Senate. This shows that pro-slavery Southern politicians wanted to enforce the legality of slavery and put down all efforts from the North to petition its removal. This was actually intended to subdue Northern radicals, but it only inflamed and angered them more against the southern side, and made all efforts to compromise even harder.
Purpose: To stop Northerners from putting an end to slavery and passing bills citing its cruelties and proposing its removal. I would use this to explain how the Gag rule inflamed Northerners against the Southern point of view and compromise became less likely.
Second body paragraph
Topic Sentence: There were hugely differing views in the first half of the 19th century on the powers of the federal government, and when states confronted the federal government, hostility was bred.
Evidence
-Henry Clay suggested that South Carolina, which had declared the Tariff of 1828 null and void, was acting foolish. He expressed that it was impractical for South Carolina to try to override the laws of the US because they were dependent on the Union economically would not survive if it seceded. This suggested that the federal government, which had the North’s support was trying to put down South Carolina and states rights and make them seem powerless. This angered advocates of states rights and further lessened the chance of compromise.
Historical Situation: The Nullification Crisis, when South Carolina declared the Tariff of 1828 null and void and had a confrontation with the federal government in which South Carolina lost and was not supported by other Southern States. This drew resentment from some Southerners who thought the North might use the powers of the federal government power to abolish slavery.
-Daniel Webster had complaints about the North in how they did not abide by the Fugitive Slave Law, and were just as bad as the South for not complying with the laws of the federal government. Northerners had challenged the Fugitive Slave law in disgust and refused to obey it. Southerners had grown very angry at the North because the South had conceded many things in the Compromise of 1850 and the North wouldn’t follow their only concession–the South was now defending the powers of the federal government to enforce laws and the North was trying to declare the Fugitive Slave law null and void.
3rd Body Paragraph
Topic Sentence: Sectionalism was the most important force that encouraged bitterness because the South and the North encouraged loyalty to themselves and bred resentment and prejudice to the other.
Evidence
-In the Herald the writer makes clear his disgust with Northern ways of life, saying they were not on the high moral ground like they thought they were, and Southern gentleman were much more well bred. This is an example of Sectionalism because the writer is professing his loyalty to the South and aversion with anything to do with the North. This type of document caused resentment from the North and the South alike against each other and furthered the potential inability to compromise.
Intended Audience: The document was intended for Southerners who were pro slavery and to get them riled up against Northerners and profess loyalties to the South, which would certainly make it much harder to compromise.
-Abraham Lincoln reflected in his 1858 speech about how men were agitated and very opinionated about the debate over slavery, and how all of the blame should not be placed on politicians. He is pointing to a more deep rooted disagreement over slavery, and this extends to loyalty to one’s state or region, namely the South. Men are driven by greed for money and power but also by pressure from their peers, family, and the ideals of their homeland. This internal disagreement is not one that could have been solved with one compromise.
-The map of the presidential election of 1860 shows that while no Southern states voted for Lincoln, he still won, and that a president did not have to get consent of the South to get elected to office. Southerners were outraged, and it showed increasing sectional differences, which caused the Southern states to secede since they were not being “fairly” represented.