By 1820 differences between the North and South grew eminent. The majority of the northern states were rapidly industrializing and anti-slavery. The opposite was true for most Southern states, which were pro-slavery and had more agriculture and plantations than factories and industry. Between 1820 and 1861 many compromises were introduced to America in order to reduce sectional tensions between the North and South. Compromises such as the Missouri Compromise, the Compromise of 1850, and the Kansas-Nebraska act of 1854 were ineffective in diffusing sectional tensions leading up to the Civil War.
The Missouri Compromise and the Nullification Crisis were both very noteworthy events in American history. The significance of the two not only laid in the events themselves, but also the time period in which they occurred and what they foreshadowed. In short, the Missouri Compromise was an act of Congress passed in 1820 between the two faction of United States Congress, that is, the pro-slavery faction and the anti-slavery factions. The compromise primarily involved the regulation of slavery in the western territories of the United States. Although it prohibited slavery in the Louisiana Purchase Territory north of the 36 30 degree latitude, it carved out an exception for Missouri.
There are two mind paths to choose when considering the statement that the compromises of the 1800s were not really compromises, but sectional sellouts by the North, that continually gave in to the South's wishes. The first is that the compromises really were compromises, and the second is that the compromises were modes of the North selling out. Really, there is only one correct path between these two, and that is that the North sold out during these compromises and gave the South what it wanted for minimal returns. The three main compromises of the 19th century, the compromises of 1820 (Missouri) and 1850 and the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 each were ways for the south to gain more power so that eventually, it could secede. First, the Missouri Compromise of 1820 established the slavery line that allowed slavery below it and forbid slavery above it.
If you drive to another state, the state that you drove to is required to honor your driver’s license. The states are also required to recognize any sort of official decision made by the courts in a different state
In the 1860’s the United States weren’t united because of the issue of slavery. The civil war was never just about getting the union back together, but about making it count and getting rid of slavery. The south wanted their slaves and would say they are “-the happiest, and in some, the freest people in the world”. (Doc 5) However, the north knew that was not true because of Harriet Beecher Stowe's “Uncle Tom’s Cabin”. In 1854 when the Kansas-Nebraska act was passed it caused some issues. Anti-slavery supporters were not happy because they did not want expansion of slavery, but the pro-slavery supporters weren’t happy because they wanted slavery everywhere for sure. (Doc. 7)The Kansas-Nebraska act caused trouble before it was even passed, Senator Charles Sumner argued against and attacked pro-slavery men causing Preston Brooks to beat Sumner with a cane. The south praised Brooks while the north felt for Sumner. (Doc 8) In 1858 during his acceptance speech Lincoln said his famous line, “A house divided
The North was based on industrialism and the South on agriculture. Perhaps one of the greatest issues ever faced by the United States was that of slavery. The South had become extremely content with their way of life with slaves and the North were very against it. This caused many disagreements between the two regions and ultimately was one of the main causes of the Civil War. They also had different views on tariffs due to the difference in the economies. The North was booming with industrialization and they didn’t like competing with the goods being imported. The tariffs provided protection for the northern industries and in turn had a negative impact they had on the southern economy. This only amplified the uneasy feeling that the South felt about the Union. They feared the Union would grow too powerful and the people would eventually lose their voice. It was the Missouri Compromise of 1820 that opened the door and unleashed the beast that was sectionalism in the nation. After the compromise the North and South had a hard time agreeing on anything.
Between 1800 and 1860 slavery in the American South had become a ‘peculiar institution’ during these times. Although it may have seemed that the worst was over when it came to slavery, it had just begun. The time gap within 1800 and 1860 had slavery at an all time high from what it looks like. As soon as the cotton production had become a long staple trade source it gave more reason for slavery to exist. Varieties of slavery were instituted as well, especially once international slave trading was banned in America after 1808, they had to think of a way to keep it going – which they did. Nonetheless, slavery in the American South had never declined; it may have just come to a halt for a long while, but during this time between 1800 and 1860, it shows it could have been at an all time high.
Throughout American history, politics changed with the times, forming and growing as new situations and environments took place. However, the most drastic differences occurred between 1815 and 1840. During this time, the North and South develop different economic systems, which created political differences between the regions. Between 1815 and 1840, the number of eligible voters drastically increased as politicians utilized a wider variety of campaigning methods in order to appeal to as many voters as possible, all essentially caused by economic growth. Politics grow to include universal white male suffrage, a strong national government, and nationalism versus sectionalism. Economic Growth (American System, Industrial Revolution, Sectional Economies, Internal Improvements & Inventions) caused the political party changes.
The Compromise of 1850 and Kansas-Nebraska Acts were very advantageous to the South. In both pieces of legislation the south gained things that would aid them in their campaign to expand slavery. The advantages the south included a stronger fugitive slave law, the possibility for slavery to exist in the remaining part of the Mexican Cession, the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, and the eventual plan to build the Southern Pacific Railroad.
The antebellum American antislavery movement began in the 1820s and was sustained over 4 decades by organizations, publications, and small acts of resistance that challenged the legally protected and powerful institution of slavery and the more insidious enemy of black equality, racism. Abolitionists were always a radical minority even in the free states of the North, and the movement was never comprised of a single group of people with unified motivations, goals, and methods. Rather, the movement was fraught with ambiguity over who its leaders would be, how they would go about fighting the institution of slavery, and what the future would be like for black Americans.
The years after the civil war left one half of America, the north, satisfied and the other half, the south, mostly dissatisfied. Therefore the last third of the nineteenth century, 1865-1900, was a time period in which America was mending, repairing, improving, reshaping, and reconstructing its society, economy, culture, and policies. Basically it was changing everything it stood for. This continual change can be seen in the following events that took place during this time. These events are both causes and effects of why America is what it is today. These are some examples: the reconstruction of the south, the great movement towards the west, the agricultural revolution, the rise of industrialism, the completion of the transcontinental railroad, and America's growth to gaining world power. All of these are reasons and events that characterize America as being an ever-changing nation.
As previously mentioned, slavery was at the root of most tensions that arose between the North and the South, and the annexation of new land created much conflict concerning the status of slavery. Missouri Compromise dictated that the lands of the Louisiana Purchase north of the 36¢ª30¡¯ parallel were to be free of slavery. Democratic senator Douglas, introduced a bill in early 1854 which proposed the division of the Nebraska Territory into two units, Kansas and Nebraska, and the application of his idea of ¡°popular sovereignty¡± which would allow the territorial vote to decide the area¡¯s status concerning slavery. This proposal would, in effect, repeal the Missouri Compromise, which greatly angered abolitionists and Northerners. Douglas and Southern supporters won a congressional debate and shortly after, the bill was signed. With the passage of this bill, many conflicts arose. Much personal turmoil erupted in the territories with almost immediate tragic results in ¡°Bleeding Kansas.¡± Also, the bill resulted in a complete realignment of the major political parties: The Democrats lost influence in the North and were to become the regional proslavery party of the South, the Whig Party, which had opposed the Kansas-Nebraska Act, died in the South and was weakened in the North, and a new Republican Party ...
After gaining a vast amount of land from the Louisiana Purchase, the question of slavery became geographical and political. This provided a period of national debate between pro-slavery and anti-slavery states who craved for political and economic advantages. Because of this dispute, between the North and the South, the Missouri Compromise was written, and passed in 1820. (http://www.understandingrace.org/history/gov/expan_slavery.html)
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.
...om’s Cabin in 1852, the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854, the Dred Scott Decision of 1857, John Brown’s raid on Harper’s Ferry in 1859, and the outcome of the Presidential Election of 1860—created conditions where Southerners felt the need to secede from the United States (they felt that their “way of life” was being threatened), as well as created conditions where the Northerners decided to go to war against the Southern Confederacy in order to maintain the Union. It is not surprising, however, that the Civil War occurred; since the Industrial Revolution, the Industrial North had always been different than the Agricultural South. If each region paid more attention to resolving the issues that separated them, instead of trying to prove themselves right, they could have stopped the bloodiest battle in American history (even though this is using hindsight knowledge).
The rift between northern and southern political ideals grew as the Civil War approached. Many southern politicians felt that their interests became less important as liberal Northerners dominated the political arena. As the years ticked on and more and more states were accepted into the Union, it was clear that northern and southern citizens had different sets of interest that had to be accommodated in different ways. The 1820s brought the emergence of the territory issue—which states would be accepted into the Union, and with what provisions—and mass sectional politics (as northern and southern ideals grew apart). Southerners felt that their needs were not being represented in Congress, since even though the Senate was balanced, the House had slightly more northern representatives than the south. In 18...