The Mexican-American War was the start of the Civil War. After gaining land from Mexico, the South believed that slavery could spread throughout the West . The westward expansion caused problems on whether new territories and states in the West would permit or prohibit slavery, which became one of the main disputes that led to the Civil War in the
Missouri Compromise (1820) Introduction This paper will explain and analyze the Missouri Compromise (1820). As the U.S. added territories, the issue of slavery resulted in political tension between the north and south. The southerners believed that slaves were needed to continue farming in the new lands and they attempted to introduce slave states in the west. On the other hand, the northerners argued that it was appropriate to prohibit and prevent the slavery institution from spreading westward. The north and south representatives in the House were also divided about the issue of abolition but were interested in the Union.
The divided opinion amongst the Justices illustrated the divided nation (Scott v. Sandford 1875). When the Dred Scott case came to the Supreme Court, the nation was in a time of great divide, with pro and antislavery groups arguing about whether new states should enter the nation as "slave" states, where slavery was legal, or "free" states, where slavery was illegal. The nation was on the verge of violent conflict over the issue and Congress was too divided to do anything (Pearson Education Inc. 2005). This argument was heightened by the establishment of the Missouri Compromise of 1820, which had some territories enter the nation as slave states and others as free states (Independence Hall Association 2013). The Supreme Court did something out of character.
Although in the Missouri Compromise, Missouri became a slave state and Maine became a free state, it was an example of disunity. All new states north of the Mason-Dixon Line would be free and new states southward would be slave states. As a result, there was also an unbalanced sectional population between the North and South. (Doc. E & F).
Preparing for the abolition of the implemented throughout 1862. December 30, 1862, the president signed "Emancipation Proclamation", announced blacks living in the territories in rebellion against the United States, "now and forever" free. The document gave impetus to the adoption of Amendment XIII (1865) to the US Constitution. Proclamation been rightly criticized by radical Republicans, since the emancipation of slaves was carried out where it is not distributed power of the federal government, but it has changed the nature of the Civil War, turning it into a war for the abolition of slavery. In addition, it has forced foreign countries, including the UK, do not support the Confederacy.
Jerry’s rescue illustrates the debate on Federal and state law on slavery. The Fugitive slave act complicated all of this. Now slave owners could cross into free states to retrieve fugitive slaves when under that states law they were free. The north used the free labor argument to append to the political discussion and hopefully abolish slavery. The Debate just escalated into violence after the Kansas Nebraska Act where a State could possibly decide on slavery through popular sovereignty.
In addition, Salmon Chase was able to further define his political prowess through the progression of the 1837 Matilda case, where the particular application of the Fugitive Slave Law was in question. In Chase 's opinion, a slave who had been recognized as private property in her home state of Missouri, then brought to Ohio by her master, was technically free in the state because the Fugitive Slave Law of 1793 had been rendered null by the early Northwest Ordinance of 1787. This ordinance stated that slavery would not be introduced to the new territory of the Northwest-- area that later evolved into the states of Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, and Illinois. Chase explained that since the Northwest Ordinance was put into place, still recognized in the Northwest states, " 'Wherever [slavery] exists at all, it exists only in virtue of positive law . .
The South wanted to keep slaves while the North wanted to abolish them. In conclusion, the primary cause of the civil war was not slavery instead was the issue of states rights. The Northern armies won the Civil War and the the South returned to the Union. “The Civil War started because of differences between free slaves states and the power of the government that said if slavery was correct or incorrect.”(The Civil War in America Prologue). Slavery was right at that time but now it is wrong.
Abraham’s promise was that he would not allow the United States to be broken down to small, squabbling countries. That is when Civil War started, because of the disagreement between the free and slave states over slavery in the west. The fundamental cause of civil war was the expansion of slavery and sectionalism. Civil War began on April 12, 1861 and ended on May 9, 1865. Throughout these four significantly
As a young democratic nation it was divided between two belief systems, free or enslaved backs. Slavery had a lot of complication when dealing with the national and state governments. When we go back to the Declaration of Independence we will notice the great emphasis on equality however this was not a national concept given to all. Slavery was a very controversial issue between the Northern and Southern States and what the Declaration of Independence stood for. While in the Northern part of the nation argued that Slavery was unconstitutional the Southern States fought to say that slaves were not considered people but material possessions