No war can start without any reason. So, the war between the Confederacy and the Union in 1861 was the consequence of a chain of different events and crises, which helped to intensify sectional animosity. Thus, one of the main reasons for the beginning of the American Civil War was the slavery on the territory of the United States of America, mainly Southern regions, and expansion of slavery over the territories belonging to America. Thus, the Mexican-American War, the Compromise of 1850, the Fugitive Slave Act put by the Congress of the United States of America and the Kansas-Nebraska Act made an enormous contribution to the increase of hostility among the states representing the Western and Southern territories. But there were some additional reasons, suchlike conflicts and crises. Thus, with help of additional conflicts, we can identify and analyze the reasons for the American Civil War.
specifically for you
for only $16.05 $11/page
Thereby, the first aspect I am going to discuss is the outcome of the Mexican-American War, because not only reasons but also the results of conflicts and war actions are important in order to analyze successive events connected with this one. So one of the most significant results of the Mexican-American war was the enormous territory won by the United States of America and acquired from Mexico. The conflict consisted banning of slavery on that territory. As always, the representatives of the Southern regions in the Congress claimed that the territory should be intended for slavery, whereas the representatives of the Northern regions of America claimed that this territory should be protected from the expansion of slavery. “Although many Americans rejoiced over this victory, others foresaw that questions over the status of slavery in the newly acquired territories boded ill for the future” (Boyer 293).
The next reason for the American civil war is the Compromise of 1850, which included five tangled bills. This very Compromise helped to ‘postpone’ the civil war to some indefinite period of time. But the conflict was growing steadily and the result was unavoidable. The Compromise presupposed some divisions of territories among the states. It goes without saying that both sides of the compromise did not like some of the variants of a division of the territories. As a result, the compromise was hailed “as a final settlement of sectional issues, it failed to bridge the underlying differences between North and South. Southerners had voted against the admission of California and northerners against the Fugitive Slave Act” (Boyer 305).
A part of the Compromise of 1850 was the Fugitive Slave Act, which presupposed that those slaves who escaped from their owners to other states or independent territories had to be returned to their owners. “Northern moderates accepted the Fugitive Slave act of 1850 as the price of saving the Union, but the law outraged antislavery northerners” (Boyer 306). One more contradictory aspect was introduced into the conflict between states by the Kansas-Nebraska Act, signed in 1854. “The bill’s roots lay in the seemingly uncontroversial desire of farmers to organize the large territory west of Iowa and Missouri. Railroad enthusiasts who dreamed of a rail line linking the Midwest to the Pacific also wanted the territory organized” (Boyer 309). Thus, there were new territories opened, and the new regions (Kansas and Nebraska) settled. Thus, the most burning issue was that the settlers of the new territories could decide whether to accept slavery or reject it; they could vote in order to make this decision.
Thereby we can see that all the small conflicts and crises led to the American Civil War. But the basic problem and the major aspect of all minor conflicts were the problems of slavery and expansion of slavery over the territories of the states.
Boyer, S. Paul, and Clifford Clark, and Clifford E. Clark, Jr., and Sandra McNair Hawley, and Joseph F. Kett, and Andrew Reiser. The Enduring Vision: A History of the American People. Boston: Cengage Learning, 2009.