The turmoil between the North and South about slavery brought many issues to light. People from their respective regions would argue whether it was a moral institution and that no matter what, a decision on the topic had to be made that would bring the country to an agreement once and for all. This paper discusses the irrepressible conflict William H. Seward mentions, several politician’s different views on why they could or could not co-exist, and also discusses the possible war as a result. According to William Seward, slavery was able to exist because faster modes of transportation did not exist. “Internal commerce which daily becomes more intimate is rapidly bringing these states into a higher and more perfect social unity or consolidation.” …show more content…
The new territories and the discussion of whether they would be admitted to the Union free or slave-holding stirred up animosity. The Compromise of 1850 which offered stricter fugitive slave laws, admitted California as a free state, allowed slavery in Washington D.C., and allowed new territories to choose whether they wanted to be slave-holding or free was supposed to help ease tension between the North and South. Yet Southern states wanted more new territories to be slave-holders so the institution of it would continue to grow. They believed slavery was a way of life and as Larrabee said in his senate speech, “You cannot break apart this organization and this system that has intertwined itself into every social and political fiber of that great people who inhabit one-half of the Union.” (“There is a Conflict of Races”). The North felt like the south wanted to completely monopolize the new territories and make every one of them slaveholding. Northern states also held the belief that slavery was meant to be temporary and seemed morally wrong. The North and South each believed they were right in their beliefs, “Both remained convinced that the other would stop at nothing to achieve domination” (Fellman 65). An Illinois newspaper as quoted by Fellman regarding the South says, “She aspires to nothing short of absolute …show more content…
English believed that the North would never actually go through with the abolishment of slavery but it’s interesting that with that belief he still foreshadowed the fact that these two ideals could not live in mutual peace. One would overpower the other and grow while the latter would be diminished and eventually nonexistent. Seward, on the other hand, believed that an agreement seemed very unlikely and that a war was the likely result. He said in his irrepressible conflict speech, “every new state which is organized within our ever extending domain makes its first political act a choice of the one and the exclusion of the other, even at the cost of civil war, if necessary…”. (Seward). The people of the North and South each believed fiercely in their cause, one for a free people the other for life servitude. Neither group, based on the documents presented were willing to budge regarding their beliefs. They North wanted to abolish slavery completely and the South could not understand why they had to give up their way of life because the concept was so ingrained in them as a people. The two completely different ideals could not co-exist peacefully and therefore the eventual climax of this issue, the war, was an inevitable
The United States began to dissatisfy some of its citizens and so the concerns of sectionalism, or the split of the country began to arise. There was a continuous riff between the south and the north over a few issues, a major one being slavery. The south argued that the slaves were necessary to support the southern economy. According to document A, the south were angry that the north was creating taxes that hurt the southern economy, thus increasing the need for slavery since they had to make up for the expense of the taxes. The south felt that the north was able...
In, “Apostles of Disunion: Southern Secession Commissioners and the Causes of the Civil War,” Charles B. Dew analyzes the public letters and speeches of white, southern commissioners in order to successfully prove that the Civil War was fought over slavery. By analyzing the public letters and speeches, Dew offers a compelling argument proving that slavery along with the ideology of white supremacy were primary causes of the Civil War. Dew is not only the Ephraim Williams Professor of American History at Williams College, but he is also a successful author who has received various awards including the Elloit Rudwick Prize and the Fletcher Pratt Award. In fact, two of Dew’s books, Tredegar Iron Works and Apostles of Disunion and Ironmaker to
Southern and Northern People had different ideas about the civil war. There were problems within their country and they wanted to fix them. They knew the country was created for the people and was run by the people. They wanted the nation to succeed, but one side wanted it to be free for all people no matter the race, while the southern wanted to keep slaves. With these complete opposites ideas of thinking the southern states decided their only option was to separate from the Union. They split and this left the country confused. Confused about what was in store for the nation they had grown to love. It was no longer clear what they future held for American and it would take a couple of years to get the country moving down the path that leads to the world we live in today.
The North and the South had been sectionalized for years on many issues, yet the majority of the congressmen had still come together when necessary for the good of the Nation, up until 1854. After Lincoln won the election in 1860, the nation was divided by sectionalism. Due to the Nation being divided and the Southerners being paranoid about the slaves being freed, I believe both issues were causes that led to the Civil War. Works Cited Brands, H. W.. American Stories: A History of the United States. New York: Routledge, 1998 2nd ed.
The South was fighting against a government that they thought was treating them unfairly. They believed the Federal Government was overtaxing them, with tariffs and property taxes making their lifestyles even more expensive than they already had been. The North was fighting the Civil War for two reasons, first to keep the Nation unified, and second to abolish slavery. Abraham Lincoln, the commander and chief of the Union or Northern forces, along with many other Northerners, believed that slavery was not only completely wrong, but it was a great humiliation to America. Once we can see that with these differences a conflict would surely occur, but not many had predicted that a full-blown war would breakout.
The existence of slavery was the central element of the conflict of the north and south. Other problems existed that led to this succession but none were as big as the slavery issue. The only way to avoid the war was to abolish slavery, but this was not able to be done because slavery is what kept the south running. When the south seceded it was said by Abraham Lincoln that “ a house divided against itself cannot stand. I believe this government cannot endure permanently half slave and half free.” Because slavery formed two opposing societies and slavery could never be abolished, the civil war was inevitable. These were all the reasons why the south seceded from the union, this succession was eminent and there was no plausible way to avoid it.
Constitutionally the North favored a loose interpretation of the United States Constitution, and they wanted to grant the federal government increased powers. The South wanted to reserve all undefined powers to the individual states themselves. The South relied upon slave labor for their economic well being, and the economy of the North was not reliant on such labor or in need of this type of service. This main issue overshadowed all others. Southerners compared slavery to the wage-slave system of the North, and believed their slaves received better care than the northern factory workers received from their employers. Many Southern preachers proclaimed that slavery was sanctioned in the Bible. Southern leaders had constantly tried to seek new areas into which slavery might be extended (Oates 349).
People often misunderstand the factors that led to one of the bloodiest wars in history, the Civil War. While many believe the question of the morality of slavery is what drove the South to secede, leading to the Civil War, that was not the main element. While main issue that led to the war was slavery, freedom and morality were not the center of this. It was a variety of political and economic aspects of slavery were what initiated the Civil War. Anti-Slavery writers such as Seward and Helper urged the country to abandon the extension of slavery in order to protect the union and the economy. Others believe that the abolitionist movement was what instigated the Civil War. While it did have a role in this, the morality of slavery was not the driving force behind the dissonance between the North and South. Both sides were not mainly concerned with the moral injustice of slavery, but instead of the depth of their own pockets and their sum of power. The Civil War was prompted by differing interpretations by the North and South of economic and political issues, such as free labor ideology and the spread of slavery, as seen through the analysis of documents dating prior to the beginning of the war.
As a central figure in the Republican Party and passionate advocate for anti-slavery, William Henry Seward characterized the conflict between the Southern Democrats and Northern Republicans as inevitable. Each political party had two radically different ideologies regarding the expansion of slavery into western territories. The Southern Democrats believed that slavery should exist in all western states while the Northern Republicans strongly disagreed. Similar to the ideologies of the Republicans, Seward believed that slavery was unjust and humans were granted the r...
In The article “Slavery, the Constitutional, and the Origins of the Civil War”, Paul Finkelman discusses some of the events that he believes lead the United States to have a Civil War. He discusses how both the North and the South territories of the Untied States did not see eye to eye when it came to ab...
The presidential elections of 1860 was one of the nation’s most memorable one. The north and the south sections of country had a completely different vision of how they envision their home land. What made this worst was that their view was completely opposite of each other. The north, mostly republican supporters, want America to be free; free of slaves and free from bondages. While on the other hand, the south supporters, mostly democratic states, wanted slavery in the country, because this is what they earned their daily living and profit from.
In conclusions, the Civil War was an inevitable conflict because of slavery. All aspects mention requires slavery for there to be a conflict. In addition, all states that seceded from the Union indicated that slavery was their main issue. Unless the North continued to allow slavery in the South and the expanding western territories, the conflict was sure to occur. Moreover, once the idea of money became an issue for slave owners, there was no doubt a war would ensue. Each compromise initiated by the federal government fell short of pleasing either party and violence occurred in Kansas. Slavery is the core of the inevitable Civil War and it took war to abolish it.
... for one another. The North wanted to evolve into a better society while the south continued to hold on into an “antiquated” social order. As this comes along, this difference then turns into violence, which breaks out into an all out war. With all said and done, this is why the Civil War was inevitable.
By the year of 1860, the North and the South was developed into extremely different sections. There was opposing social, economic, and political points of view, starting back into colonial periods, and it slowly drove the two regions farther in separate directions. The two sections tried to force its point of view on the nation as a whole. Even though negotiations had kept the Union together for many years, in 1860 the condition was unstable. The presidential election of Abraham Lincoln was observed by the South as a risk to slavery and many believe it initiated the war.
After thoroughly assessing past readings and additional research on the Civil War between the North and South, it was quite apparent that the war was inevitable. Opposed views on this would have probably argued that slavery was the only reason for the Civil War. Therefore suggesting it could have been avoided if a resolution was reached on the issue of slavery. Although there is accuracy in stating slavery led to the war, it wasn’t the only factor. Along with slavery, political issues with territorial expansion, there were also economic and social differences between North and South. These differences, being more than just one or two, gradually led to a war that was bound to happened one way or another.