Introduction
The civil war in America came about to preserve the union which was the United States of America. This came about as a result of two differing opinions by two groups on the role of the central government. One of the groups believed that the central government and the administrative wing of the union needed to uphold their authority to enhance the success of the merger. The other group which was against central governance was on the opinion that each of the states should be allowed to retain much of its autonomy in the newly formed country. In addition, each one of the states needed to retain the mandate to determine the rules and laws that govern its members within its boundaries and not to be forced to abide by the laws designed by the central government. Conflicts were arising because the argument was that after some time, the civil rights and constitutional rights of the individual states would be inconsistent with those of the central government conflict. Disagreements also arose on the issues about the direction that slavery should take, taxation, domestic progress, and levies. [1]
The resolutions made during the civil war of the the 1850s
Major stand-offs were experienced in the North and the South that had completely parallel points of view. The south to a larger extent completely embraced small and large-scale agricultural production that grew crops such as cotton and it also supported slavery since a lot of labor was needed in the plantations. The North to a great extent compromised industrial manufacturing of commodities from unprocessed materials; slavery had also been done away within this region. [2] Disagreements continued to rise as more states were being added to the union and so the north and the south were rather uncertain as to whether the newly added states would support slavery or oppose it, the tension was bring brought by the fact that the position of the newly recruited states on slavery was uncertain, the two regions, therefore, feared that one of them could get more powerful than the other depending on the position taken by the new states.
To settle the disagreements between the two regions, the compromise of the1850. In line with this, two states that were to beaded to the union, that is Kansas and Nebraska were allowed to choose whether they would support slavery or not. Nebraska had all along been against slavery while Kansas was rather undecided and so some individuals took anti-slavery campaigns there to convince people not to support slavery but this did not go down well with many people thereby causing skirmishes in the region. This made Kansas to be barred from the union until 1961 when it joined the union though as an anti-slavery state[3]. Around that time too, the bill was passed that allowed the owners of the slaves the right to travel to the North and capture any of their slaves that may have escaped.
The civil war in the United States could have been caused by many factors. At end of the war in Mexico, America was allowed to have the western regions of the country but this presented a great problem since these newer territories would admit as states and so the issue was as to whether they were going to be support slavery or not. The compromise of 1850 made California be a free slave state but Utah and Mexico people were allowed to make the decision. The fugitive slave act obligated the central government officials to capture any slaves who tried to escape and if they failed to do so then they were made to pay a fine[4]. This act created, led to an increased anti-slavery campaign and it also led to many slaves fleeing using the underground railway system to escape to Canada. Harriet Beecher wrote the book; Life among the lowly, which highlighted the plights of the slave and therefore increased the tempo of the anti-slavery campaigns. This book was widely read and to a great extent, it changed the way the northerners perceived slavery. This could have contributed to the civil war. Another cause of the civil war is what is famously known as bleeding Kansas, this occurred when open war broke between the anti and pro-slavery activists in Kansas. Preston Brooks attacked Charles Summer after he gave a speech in an attack of the pro-slavery campaigns about the violence that was taking place in Kansas, among other factors that caused slavery.
The case about Dred Scott lost case when he tried to convince the court that he should be set free because he was captured to be a slave during a time when he was living in a free state[5]. The court ruled against him arguing that he owned no property and that even if the person who owned him had taken him into a free state, he still belonged to the person who owned him and could not consider himself free just because he was living in a free state. This again increased the ant slavery campaigns. The rejection of the Lecompton constitution in 1858 that attempted to make Kansas be a slave state also served to increase the anti-slavery warfare. John Brown led a revolutionary group to raid a weapon store in West Virginia to use the weapons to wage war against slavery was captured together with the people he was with and killed. This too contributed to the eruption of the war. Lastly, another factor that could have caused the eruption of the civil war was the election of Abraham Lincoln as the president.
The civil war was not only a result of slavery but it was instead a battle over self-governance but the slavery issue was the cause of dispute between the states. Many of the whites from the south felt that the election of Lincoln as the president was going to be a great threat to their way of life since Lincoln was not really in support of slavery. So after his election, many states led by South Carolina seceded out of the union. Lincoln as the president of the United States was faced with the big challenge of freeing slaves and preserving the union which was at the brink of collapse[6].
The role of the Party platforms on the civil war of the 1850s
During the time of the war, several parties emerged. In January 1850 the senator of Whig Henry Clay gave a speech in which he mainly dealt with the issues that he felt were interfering with the union. In his speech, he proposed the division of Texas, this thought was never implemented. Senator Stephen A. Douglas succeeded in having the 1850 compromise succeed. Later the union considered the suggestion to divide Texas, created regional administrations with popular sovereignty for Utah and New Mexico while California was declared a free state, and then the public sale of slaves was stopped in Columbia but the fugitive act was put in place[7].
William Henry Seward led a large number of the Northern Whigs who were opposed to compromise since it did not apply to the western regions and because of the fugitive law which forced the ordinary citizens to be indulged in a time-wasting act of looking for the runaway slaves. Zachary Taylor on the other hand tried not to indulge in the issue of capturing fugitive slaves, as the Whig candidate during the general elections in 1948. But since the president tried to bypass the whole debate by forcing the entrance of California and New Mexico as Free states he evaded the whole procedure that is normally followed and therefore putting a sense of doubt on the Wilmot proviso. Even though Taylor was from the south, his stand was quite contrary to that of the southerners. The democrats from the north and the Whigs from the south were in support of the 1850 compromise but the Whigs from the south were mainly from the border states were in support of the fugitive law[8].
A committee made agreed on the plan to divide Texas according to Clay’s proposal though the measurements were later adjusted. During one of the debates concerning this issue by the senate, vice president Millard Fillmore and Senator Benton seriously disagreed when Fillmore claimed that the Missouri compromise was in a mess. Around that same time, a group of southerners who had slaves sent some delegates to attend the Nashville conference to confirm whether the compromise will gain ground or not. In this convention, some delegates proposed pulling out of the union but at the end of the convention, the temperate won and they came up with a lot of concessions as well as increasing the geographic separating boundaries that had been set by the Missouri Compromise.
The different bills were put together in one anthological bill which did not succeed in passing through the senate because only a few individuals in the senate supported all those bills. The death of president Taylor brought a great change after Fillmore had taken over the office; this is because the new governance influenced the senate to be in support of the compromise. The Democrats from the north united in support of each of the bills and earned the support of the Whigs and the democrats from the South as well. After these bills had been passed, California got an entrance into the union but as a free state, slavery got banned, the boundaries of New Mexico and Utah got categorized under the statute of popular sovereignty, the fugitive act got passed and this gave all the American citizens the mandate to capture any of the slaves that could have escaped from the US. As a result of this, the state of Texas was forced to give away a portion of its land which was compensated for[9]. The 1850 compromise was generally accepted politically since the two parties dedicated themselves to their proposals and policies that they wanted to form part of the final compromise. Major oppositions to the compromise were in Alabama, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Georgia but the unionists managed to bring the whole nation together. Historians think that the compromise was important in the sense that it helped in delaying the civil war for about ten years. During this same period, the Whig party was dismantled and it got replaced by the Republican Party that was mainly prevailing in the North while the democrats in the South.
The Role of the Contemporary Speeches during the civil war
One of the greatest speeches during the civil war was the house divided speech by Abraham Lincoln. The title of the speech was that “a house divide against itself can not stand.” In this speech, Lincoln expresses his fears about the gleam status of events on the senate and the union as well[10]. He feels that the divisions in the senate and the union may result in a collapse of the union. In this speech, he was also asking the opponents of slavery to come up with means that will ensure its extinction while to the proponents, he told them to push for its spread so that it becomes like a law in all the states of the union[11]. This speech by Lincoln played a big role in informing the citizens about the need to abolish slavery. This speech also highlighted the shortcoming of the decision made about Dred Scot concerning Senator Douglas by declaring that neither an African American nor their descendants could be a citizen of the United States; this was not in line with the constitution of the United States since it states that all the citizens are eligible for all the rights and the and protection enjoyed by the other citizens in various states.
William Henry Seward, a leader of the Northern Whigs, gave a speech he called the higher law speech[12]. which was in opposition to the compromise that he argued was not in support of the Wilmot Proviso to the western regions. He also opposed the compromise because he felt that the fugitive act which was rather absurd since it meant that the Whigs living at the borders were expected to go on patrols to capture the runaway slaves, according to William, this was quite myopic. Seward also gave another speech he called ‘freedom in the new territories.’ In this speech, he argued that the American constitution did recognize slavery in the states where it already existed but not in the newly admitted ones[13].
He argued that the new states were administered by rules greater than the constitution. In this speech, he asserted that slavery in the southern regions was damned and he also demanded the entrance of California as a free state. This speech by Seward had a lot of impacts, especially outside the senate. Those in support o the compromise argued that Seward was trying to challenge the constitution to suit his political interests. This speech according to a columnist in the New York Tribune reinforced the union by advocating for the approval of great authority rather than subverting the constitution. A few weeks after Seward had given the speech, thousands of copies of the speech were made and this led to a division of the Whig party into pro-slavery and anti-slavery. About ten years later as different states began to pull out of the union; Seward also changed his tactics and became more assuaging in approaching the conflicts with the southerners.
An intense debate evolved between Douglas and Lincoln Lincoln. Douglas’s opinion was in support of the Dred Scots decision that likened the slaves to personal possessions[14]. Douglas asserted that Lincoln was out to completely abolish slavery and that the freed blacks were going to be a threat to the whites in accessing employment. Lincoln in his defense asked Douglas to state his opinion on popular sovereignty. In his speech that was designated ‘free port doctrine’ in which he stated that the inhabitants of the new states should be allowed to decide whether they would be free or in support of slavery. This did not go down well with the democrats who felt that it advocated for the abolition of slavery.
The other speech was by Henry clay which referred to as the ‘compromise”[15]. Speech in which he asserted that the compromise did not mean interfering with one party’s demands for the sake of another. He asserted that the compromise was about reciprocated recognition and mutual surrender. He called for both those in support of abolitionism and freesoilism to be considerate of each other’s rights to make things work[16].
Conclusions
The civil war in America came about as a result to preserve the union. This came about as a result of two differing opinions by two groups on the role of the central government. One of the groups believed that the central government and the administrative wing of the union needed to uphold their authority to enhance the success of the merger. Conflicts were arising because the argument was that after some time the civil rights and constitutional rights of the individual states would be inconsistent with those of the central government conflict. Some of the major parties during this time were the Whig 1party which later became today’s Republican Party and the Democratic Party. 4The contemporary speeches made by Lincoln, Seward, and Douglas among others contributed to the civil war as more and more of the Southerners felt threatened by the calls for the abolition of slavery. The stern platforms taken by various groups on the compromise led to the secession of various states from the union as well as contributing to the civil war.
Annotated Bibliography
Anonymous. The civil War. N.d, Web.
The civil war in the United States was caused by the differences between the Northerners and the Southerners. The Southerners mainly constituted the the whites who owned large plantations and therefore they supported slavery in order to provide them with labor force for their farms. The people from the South supported the Compromise to a large extent especially because of the fugitive act that enabled them to recapture runaway slave. The people from the north on the hand felt that the fugitive act was oppressive and they also demanded that the compromise may allow the slaves living in the Free states to be free.
Bancroft, David G. Henry Clay “compromise” speech: “the nature of the government and its operations” Washington, D.C. – February 6, 1850. N.d. Web.
In his compromise speech, Henry Clay is Marjory trying to unravel the true meaning of “the comprise”. He argues that the compromise did not mean undermining another groups rights but it meant mutual sacrifice and surrender. In this speech he argues that if this is not done ten the union is bound to collapse.
Clifford, Clark, et.al. The Enduring Vision: A History of the American. London: Cengage, 2009.
The fugitive slave act was an ide3a put in place in order to prevent the slaves from escaping from the United States. The act was passed as one of the bills that composed the 1850 compromise. This act obligated the military men to capture any runaway slaves, failure to which they were made to pay a fine. The fugitive slave act also likened slaves to property, meaning that they belonged to the owner and they would not be guaranteed freedom even if they moved to Free states.
Cosson, Jody. Civil War and Reconstruction (1850-1877). NY: Weigl Publishers Inc, 2007.
The support of the Southerners was not really in support of Lincoln as a presidential candidate. This is because they felt that Lincoln was an abolitionist and was therefore going to interfere with slavery. This is what Douglas used a number of times against Lincoln claiming that Lincoln was in support of abolition and that the freed slaves were going to be a threat to the whites in acquisition of employment. In one of the speeches that Lincoln gave he affirmed that his intention of abolishing slavery was not really to make the blacks nod whites have equal rights.
Holt, Michael F. The Rise and fall of the American Whig Party: Jacksonian Politics and the Onset of the Civil War. NY: Oxford University Press US, 2003.
Kansas and Nebraska were allowed to make a choice whether they were wanted to be free or not. Nebraska was already decided on being a free state while Kansas was not decided yet. So some anti slavery activists took the ant slavery campaign to Kansas. This led to a conflict between them and the pro slavery activists and a good number of people were killed in this incidence.
Keegan, John. The American Civil War: A Military History. NY: Knopf, 2004.
In the union, the north and the south were in constant conflict over differing opinions, the other differences were arising over the the role of the federal government. One of the groups was of the opinion that the central government and the administrative wing of the union needed to uphold their authority in order to enhance the success of the merger. The other group which was against central governance were of the opinion that each of the states should be allowed to retain much of their autonomy in the newly formed country. According to them, it was important that each one of the states is that each one of them retains the mandate to determine the rules and laws that govern its members within its own boundaries and not to be forced to abide by the laws designed by the central government.
Kelly, Martin. Scott v. Stanford – Court Case of Scott v. Stanford. N.d. Web.
Dred Scot, an African American went to court in order to plead for his freedom since according to him he was living in a free state. The court ruled against him arguing that as a slave he was a equated to a property and therefore he was a property of the person who bought. This therefore made him a slave whether he was in a slave state or not.
Kelly, Martin. Lincoln-Douglas Debates: History and Significance of the Lincoln Douglas Debates. N.d, Web.
Douglas opinion was in support of the Dred Scots decision that likened the slaves to personal possessions. Douglas asserted that Lincoln was out to completely abolish slavery and that the freed blacks were going to be a threat to the whites in accessing employment. Lincoln in his defense asked Douglas to state his opinion on the popular sovereignty. In his speech that was designated ‘free port doctrine’ in which he stated that the inhabitants of the new states should be allowed to decide whether they would be free or in support of slavery. The position taken by Douglas on this issue was not received well by the other democrats who felt that Douglas was also in support of abolition.
Lee, Robert. The American Civil War: Abraham Lincoln’s ‘House Divided Speech’ (1858). Web.
In this speech Lincoln expresses his fears about the gleam status of events on the senate and the union as well (Lee, 2006). He feels that the divisions in the congress and in the union may result in a collapse of the union. In this speech, he was also asking the opponents of slavery to come up with means that will ensure its extinction while to the proponents, he told them to push for its spread so that it becomes like a law in all the states of the union. In this speech he tells the Americans to embrace reconciliatory approaches in dealing with divisions, he argues that as both the north and the south are not survived with state of affairs then the union is unlikely to survive.
MacKinnon, Ava. The American Civil War: A Study of Conflict Resolution. 2007, Web.
In this article, the speech by Henry Clay advocating for the division of Texas is highlighted. This did not get accomplished was later accomplished after Douglas had pushed for it though the measurements were adjusted. Seward also lead a group of Whig members to campaign against the compromise that he argued, did not support the western regions and that it also contained the fugitive act that engaged the citizens in a time wasting activity of looking for runaway slaves.
Seward, William. Classic Senate Speeches: Freedom in the new territories (appeal to a “Higher Law”). 1850. N.d, Web.
In his speech, Seward argues that the compromise was inefficient since it did support the western theories he was also against the fugitive act which was part of the compromise. Seward argues that slavery in the southern regions was damned and he also demanded the entrance of California as a free state. Others argued that Seward was trying to challenge the constitution by claiming that the constitution only governed states already in existence but the newly admitted ones were under the control of greater powers. A division developed in the Whig party due to this with some of the, members being ant slavery while others being in support of slavery.