Pros And Cons Of The Civil War

1352 Words6 Pages

It was April 12th,1861 when the Civil War in America officially began. The main argument from the South for secession was that they felt that the North was imposing their ideas on them starting from the abolitionists from decades prior. Though, arguably, a civil war was pending from the beginning. Tensions rising could be seen at four different time frames. First, when the North gained economic advantages over the South due to the different bases of their respective economies. The second wave of the division could be noted during the three political compromises between the North and South, which left both sides discontented. Thirdly, the reform movement that swept the northern half of the nation had the South drawing back from bold abolitionists. …show more content…

The Missouri Compromise, The Compromise of 1850, and The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 were all temporary, political compromises that did nothing to help settle the growing power conflict between the two regions. As a matter of fact, the half-hearted compromises only drove the North and South farther apart in ideals and standings. Before any of the compromises were made, the people of the United States were separating into pro-slavery and anti-slavery factions, standing at a fragile peace with an equal amount of free and slave states. When Missouri asked to join the union as a slave state, it was a political uproar. Both factions being all too aware of the political pull and power the either would gain in politics if they had their way. In the end, it was The Missouri Compromise which allowed Missouri to join as a slave state, granting Maine's request to join as a slave-free state as well. The compromise also stated that Congress prohibited slavery in the Louisiana Territory north of the 36° 30´ latitude line for new states (Researchers, LibraryofCongress.org). When the Compromise of 1850 pushed the boundaries of cooperation once more, the results were: a stronger Fugitive Slave Law Act, slave trade being abolished in Washington D.C. (the nation's capital), and California and Utah joining the union as free and slave states respectively. Then there came the nefarious Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854. The issue lied in the outcome, popular sovereignty. Popular sovereignty can be defined in layman's terms: the people's rule, free of federal interference of their domestic rule. It [popular sovereignty] allowed for incoming states to decide whether or not they would allow slavery in their state, disregarding the Missouri Compromise complete. People, once more, felt threatened by the idea of being threatened by the

Open Document