More handpicked essays just for you.
Slavery as a course of civil war in the united states of america
Slavery in the southern colony
Slavery in the southern colony
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In Alexander H. Stephens’s speech, “Corner Stone” was a speech directed to the Confederate states and those in favor of slavery highlighting the importance of black people not be equal to the white people. This speech is the foundation of the Confederacy implementing slavery. He announced to the crowds that the “new government” contradicts and goes against the foundations of the country. Stephen announces, “The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution African slavery as it exists amongst us the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution” (2). Here Stephen isn’t afraid to question the constitution …show more content…
Our confederacy is founded upon principles in strict conformity with these laws” (4). Stephen tells his audience that unlike the North and rest of the United States, the Confederate is “founded upon principles in strict conformity with these laws”. He alludes the audience to believe that everyone opposed to the Confederacy is wrong because they are the ones who are falsely making up their own beliefs and are not conforming to the laws which are set into place. This document helps to understand the confederacy’s point of view of why they decided that slavery should be accepted. This is a primary source because it talks directly in relation to the civil war, it also address the reason for the civil …show more content…
Toomb addresses the problem that the country is growing and new states are coming into the territory because of this expansion. Tomb offers an incentive to this by stating, “The South at all times demanded nothing but equality in the common territories, equal enjoyment of them with their property, to that extended to Northern citizens and their property ~ nothing more. They said, we pay our part in all the blood and treasure expended in their acquisition. Give us equality of enjoyment, equal right to expansion it is as necessary to our prosperity as yours. In 1790 we had less than eight hundred thousand slaves. Under our mild and humane administration of the system they have increased above four millions” (2). He says that he played fair by attending to the south as well as the north, but with the population of the slaves increasing so dramatically the one way to solve this issue to move westward and expand. He then states, “We must expand or perish. We are constrained by an inexorable necessity to accept expansion or extermination” (3). He simply states that if we do not expand then we will perish and become extinct. The black population is increasing so vast that soon if we don’t expand to spread the slaves out then we will no longer be in control but rather the slaves. Toomb does not show sign of trying to eliminate slavery for the
On the question as to whether states’ rights was the cause of the Civil War, Dew references a speech made by Jefferson Davis, president of the Confederate States of America, during his inaugural address as one that “remains a classic articulation of the Southern position that resistance to Northern tyranny and a defense of states’ rights were the sole reason for secession. Constitutional differences alone lay at the heart of the sectional controversy, he insisted. ‘Our present condition…illustrates the American idea that governments rest upon the consent of the governed, and that it is the right of the people to alter or abolish governments whenever they become destructive of the ends for which they were established’”(13).
Throughout the years, many people have been taught that the reason the Civil War happened, was to abolish slavery all through the United States. Although that is true, there were more reasons why the Civil War occurred.Referencing will be done on different articles and writers to support the findings of the authors. The article “Slavery, the Constitutional, and the Origins of the Civil War” by Paul Finkelman, discusses about the North (union) and the South (confederacy) and the disagreement of the territories following the constitutional laws regarding slavery, the article explores both sides of the territories and their beliefs of how the situation of slavery should have been dealt with. The article “The Economic Origins of the Civil War” by Marc Egnal, discusses the North’s (union) and the South’s (confederacy) economic situation that could have pushed the two territories to engage in war with one another. Finally, the last article “Politics, Ideology, and the Origins of the American Civil War” by Eric Foner, focuses on the Norths (union) and Souths (confederacy) views on politics and ideas of how each territory is ran and how they have affected the North and the South. These historians supplied specific and different explanations that explained what exactly caused the United States to enter into a Civil War. With the information provided by the authors, the evidence will lead us to the answer of what caused the Civil War.
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
Many characters have hopes and dreams which they wish to accomplish. Of Mice and Men has two main characters that go through obstacles to get what they want. In the beginning it is George and Lennie running away trying to get a job. Once both George and Lennie have a job they try to accomplish their dreams. Unfortunately they both can't get their dreams to come true since lennie does the worst and George has to shoot Lennie. Steinbeck uses characterization, foreshadowing, and symbol as rhetorical strategies to make George's actions justified.
The Mississippi Black Codes document of 1865 was presented to us by Walter L. Fleming, who was a historian who dealt with the south and more specifically the reconstruction era. He was targeting future historians who were studying this era. He nearly states the pros and cons of what the Mississippi Black Codes asked of their citizens. There were several things in the document that interested me in what history was at this time period. On the other hand, there were parts of the amendments to the government which I found very unethical with my present-day mindset. I realize such times were different, but it still made me sick to my stomach that “Freedmen, Free Negroes, and Mulattoes” were treated very differently than the ways such as whites were treated. The author breaks down the documents into different sections of the reconstruction plan. At first, he starts out talking about vagrant laws, which stated that the newly emancipated citizens had special laws that pertained to them. They were treated like animals that were forced to work if they did not have ownership of property. If they couldn’t hold down a job, on the second
A numerous amount of generals and soldiers of the south had a predisposed idea regarding what every person was fighting for, and from the looks of it, they were more so on the same page. When referring to what the war was being fought over, Englishmen Pickett used an analogy that gives reference to a “gentlemen’s club”, and not being able to maneuver out of it (Shaara 88). The men believed that the war conceived out of the misinterpretation of the constitution in regards to what or what not they had the right to do. In all, a large number of those fighting believed that the confederate army fought to protect the southern society, and slavery as an integral part of
At the time, the South depended on slavery to support their way of life. In fact, “to protect slavery the Confederate States of America would challenge the peaceful, lawful, orderly means of changing governments in the United States, even by resorting to war.” (635) Lincoln believed that slavery was morally wrong and realized that slavery was bitterly dividing the country. Not only was slavery dividing the nation, but slavery was also endangering the Union, hurting both black and white people and threatening the processes of government. At first, Lincoln’s goal was to save the Union in which “he would free none, some, or all the slaves to save that Union.” (634) However, Lincoln realized that “freeing the slaves and saving the Union were linked as one goal, not two optional goals.” (634) Therefore, Lincoln’s primary goal was to save the Union and in order to save the Union, Lincoln had to free the slaves. However, Paludan states that, “slave states understood this; that is why the seceded and why the Union needed saving.” (634) Lincoln’s presidential victory was the final sign to many Southerners that their position in the Union was
As the Civil War came underway the South’s military, smaller than the North’s, would take heavy blows from the decisions of the Confederacy. First of all they knew that if all their plantation owners fought in the war, their crops would possibly die out or not produce as much. To combat this problem they decided in the Conscription law that if someone had twenty or more slaves, they didn’t have to fight in the war. This caused the price of slaves to increase and caused crops from small slave holding plantations and yeoman farmers to do terrible. Since most Southerners fell into that category, the South would really feel the damage. Also the Impressment Act would take food from farmers to help feed the armies. This would demoralize the small Southern farmers and cause desertions, poor riots and ultimately put a negative face on the new confederacy. These internal divisions weren’t only a Southern problem, in fact the North had bitter divisions over conscription, taxes, suspension of habeas corpus, martial law and emancipation. “If anything, the opposition was more powerful and effective in the North than in the South.” (Why Did the Confederacy Lose?, pg 120) However the powerful opposition in the North w...
In spite of its deterioration, the aftermath of the revolt had extensive consequences. Robertson particularized them with references to John Calhoun fortifying South Carolina before the civil war occurred. It also left a scare in the people’s minds, and was another small step towards the abolishment of slavery. Robertson analyzed the aftermath in a variety of aspects, including the effects on the public, and the government.
...iduals plotting conspiracy and selling out their promises for a considerable length of time before 1860, and that they were not going to stop short of their objectives. The main thing that might have avoided war might be the acknowledgement of bondage by the United States or the surrender of the United States of every last one of states and regions it held that called itself the Confederacy. Since that might not have finished subjugation, then the response is that there was no elective however to have a clash, a war. Subjugation was the issue, it was the reason. It was an ascertained arrangement by the individuals who decided to ensure servitude by selling out their kinsmen and turning rebellious--to secure subjugation, and not a legendary thought of "state's rights" on the grounds that the main right they thought about was the right to subjugate an alternate race.
The memory of massive death was still in the front of everyone’s mind, hardening into resentment and sometimes even hatred. The south was virtually non-existent politically or economically, and searching desperately for a way back in. Along with these things, now living amongst the population were almost four million former slaves, who had no idea how to make a living on their own. They had been freed by the 13th amendment in 1865, and in the future became a great concern to many political leaders. Still, it was no secret that something had to be done. So, as usually happens, political leaders appeared on the stage, each holding their own plan of Reconstruction, each certain their ideas were the correct ones. One of the first people who came up with a blueprint for Reconstruction was the president at the time, Abraham Lincoln. The “Lincoln Plan” was a very open one, stating that after certain criteria were met a confederate state could return to the union. To rejoin, a state had to have ten percent of voters both accept the emancipation of slaves and swear loyalty to the union. Also, those high ranking officers of the state could not hold office or carry out voting rights unless the president said
Tensions between the North and South had grown steadily since the anti slavery movement in 1830. Several compromises between the North and South regarding slavery had been passed such as the Nebraska-Kansas and the Missouri act; but this did little to relieve the strain. The election of President Lincoln in 1861 proved to be the boiling point for the South, and secession followed. This eventually sparked the civil war; which was viewed differently by the North and the South. The Northern goal was to keep the Union intact while the Southern goal was to separate from the Union. Southern leaders gave convincing arguments to justify secession. Exploring documents from South Carolina’s secession ordinance and a speech from the Georgia assembly speech will explain how the Southern leaders justify the secession from the United States.
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.
Though the issue of slavery was solved, racism continues and Southerners that stayed after the war passed Black Codes which subverted the ideas of freedom including the actions of state legislatures (Hakim 19). Black Codes were a set of laws that discriminated blacks and limited their freedom (Jordan 388). Such restrictions included: “No negro shall be permitted to rent or keep a house within said parish...No public meetings or congregations of negroes shall be allowed within said parish after sunset…” (Louisiana Black Codes 1865). A solution to this was the 14th Amendment. It meant now all people born in America were citizens and it “Prohibited states from revoking one’s life, liberty, or property without due process of law.” This meant all states had to...
Imagine a historian, author of an award-winning dissertation and several books. He is an experienced lecturer and respected scholar; he is at the forefront of his field. His research methodology sets the bar for other academicians. He is so highly esteemed, in fact, that an article he has prepared is to be presented to and discussed by the United States’ oldest and largest society of professional historians. These are precisely the circumstances in which Ulrich B. Phillips wrote his 1928 essay, “The Central Theme of Southern History.” In this treatise he set forth a thesis which on its face is not revolutionary: that the cause behind which the South stood unified was not slavery, as such, but white supremacy. Over the course of fourteen elegantly written pages, Phillips advances his thesis with evidence from a variety of primary sources gleaned from his years of research. All of his reasoning and experience add weight to his distillation of Southern history into this one fairly simple idea, an idea so deceptively simple that it invites further study.