Civil War Dbq

The
The cause of the Civil War is difficult to diagnose entirely. Historian James G. Randall puts forward an agreeable argument that the Civil War stemmed from the divide between the secessionists and abolitionists. Both parties exaggerated the differences between the two sections and would lead the Union towards war. Randall claims that the North and South were fundamentally alike and slavery was not the fundamental cause of the war. These differences regarding the issue of slavery would be then exaggerated by the sections to create a background of distrust too great to overcome. The abolitionists, in particular, turned political differences over slavery to be settled by compromise. The inability to compromise would be driven by the rift

The issue was not slavery but rather a power struggle between the North and South. Laws that interfered with the South’s right to expand and own slaves were an issue. The South sought to assert their authority over the federal government, but the issue of territorial expansion threatened Southern states rights and autonomy. The Wilmot Proviso opposed the further expansion of slavery as a result of the Mexican War and stated that “The future greatness and glory of this Republic demands that the progress of domestic slavery should be arrested now and forever.” David Wilmot’s amendment represented the growing resentment towards the South and proslavery policies. His policy was supported by Northern Congressmen but rejected by a Southern-dominated Senate. This would intensify sectional tensions. Debates over the territories followed. Henry Clay offered an interesting perspective and insisted that slavery was unsustainable in the new territories because of the climate and soil. He opposed the Wilmot Proviso and stated that “California and New Mexico, I hold slavery to be excluded from those territories by a law even superior to that which admits and sanctions it in Texas. I mean the law of nature, of physical geography, the law of the formation of the earth.” Clay clashed with Northern antislavery leaders and denounced for betraying the Northerners. John Calhoun also heavily opposed the

Was it a free state or not? Abolitionist promoted immigration into Kansas. Civil unrest was prevalent in Kansas. Former senator David Atchison led a group of seventeen hundred armed individuals from Missouri to cast fraudulent votes. He also stated, “if that ain’t enough, we can send five hundred—enough to kill every God-damned abolitionist in the territory.” The abolitionist movement had racist motives as well. The free-state individuals of Kansas organized a constitutional convention in Topeka that discouraged slavery in Kansas but also free blacks. They wanted to keep Kansas predominantly white. This would be the beginning of many conflicts between the two movements led by significant individuals like Governor Wilson Shannon. The kerfuffle between Charles Sumner and Preston Brooks which involved “caning” highlighted the dislike between the sections. This heightened the North’s “antisouthernism” while the Southerners celebrated Brooks. What followed was radical expressions of sectionalism led by extremists by both sections. An example is Ohio Congressman Joshua Giddings’ speech to the House in 1855 describing the South as tyrannical. The Harpers Ferry Invasion was also believed by the South to be orchestrated and influenced by the Republican Party despite a failed senatorial investigation. The rift between both sections was built on the issue of slavery. Both sections used the issue of slavery not to better and free