Presentation on theme: "Growing Tensions Between North and South The economies of the North and South developed differently in the early 1800’s. The North began to develop industry."— Presentation transcript:
Growing Tensions Between North and South The economies of the North and South developed differently in the early 1800’s. The North began to develop industry and trade. The south relied on plantation farming.
Growing Tensions Between North and South Due to industrialization rapid population growth happened in Northern cities. Much of the population growth came from immigration. Immigrants and Easterners were moving west and building farms in the new states formed from the Northwest Territory. Most canals and railroads ran east to west mainly in the north causing the Mid-west and Northwest to develop strong ties to one another.
Growing Tensions Between North and South The south developed quite differently. The southern society was controlled by a few wealthy planters. The planters made great profits from slave labor. Much of the profit came from trade, and the planters relied on exports, especially cotton.
Growing Tensions Between North and South Because this was so profitable the planters invested in in slaves and agricultural instead of industry. The south developed very little industry. Most poor white southerners were farmers who did not own slaves, but they supported slavery because it kept them off the bottom of society.
Antislavery and Racism The issue of slavery caused tension between north and south and started to divide the nation (sectionalism). The abolitionist movement began growing in the north during the 1830’s. Some northern workers and immigrants opposed slavery because they saw it as an economic threat (slaves did not receive pay).
Antislavery and Racism Despite their opposition to slavery most northerners were racist. They refused to let their kids go to school with, work with, or live near African Americans. Free African Americans could not vote.
Antislavery and Racism When northerners attacked slavery the slaveholders defended their way of life. Most offered the argument that white people were superior to blacks. Many claimed that slavery helped the slaves by introducing them to Christianity, providing them food, clothing, and shelter. Slaveholders were determined to defend their way of life.
Controversy over Territories In 1848 the nations leaders were debating how to handle slavery in the newly acquired lands from the War with Mexico. The proposed addition of new states threatened the balance of power between north and south in Congress since the Missouri Compromise of 1820.
Controversy over Territories Southern states don’t have the power to pass a law expand slavery. Northern states don’t have the power to pass a law end slavery.
We want to be a state! The balance of power will be threatened when the Missouri territory asked to be admitted to the U.S. as a state. The Missouri Compromise of 1820
We want Missouri to be a free state. No slavery there! -- the Nort h We want Missouri to be a slave state ! -- the South Does it matter what we want ? The Missouri Compromise of 1820
Missouri Compromise line 36 30’ No Slavery above the line Slavery OK below the line Missouri enters as a slave state! Maine enters as a free state ! Kept power balanced once again in Congress ! The Missouri Compromise of 1820
Missouri Compromise The Missouri Compromise was made by Henry Clay “the Great Compromiser”
Protective Tariff continued to increase causing S. Carolina to protest. The tariff hurt the South, but benefited the industrial North. John Calhoun [V-President] declared S. Carolina would nullify [not obey] the tariff. S. Carolina threatened to secede –causing the Nullification Crisis Nullification is unconstitutional Congress writes a Force Bill, so Jackson could enforce payment of the tariff. Clay intervenes making a compromise, gradually lowers tariff, S. Carolina would not secede.
The Wilmot Proviso Tensions over slavery seemed to go away after the Missouri Compromise of New disagreements arouse with the outbreak of the Mexican American War in Many Northerners believed that southerners wanted to extend slavery in to the newly acquired territory David Wilmot, a Representative from Pennsylvania, proposed a law outlawing slavery in the newly acquired lands from the war with Mexico.
The Wilmot Proviso Southerners felt their property rights were being violated, Congress had no right to prevent southerners from bringing their property with them when they settled new territories. The Constitution gave equal protection to the property rights of all U.S. citizens. The Proviso removed the right of slaveholders to take their slaves, their property, anywhere in the United States and its territories. It’s unconstitutional the southerners claimed.
The Wilmot Proviso The Proviso divided Congress along regional lines. It passed the House of Representatives. Southerners killed it in the Senate.
We want to be a state too! The Compromise of 1850
Henry Clay Daniel Webster
The North wanted California admitted as a free state. The South did not want California admitted as a free state. This will upset the balance of power in Congress. The Compromise of 1850
The Fugitive Slave Law, 1850 North did not want to return slaves to the South—moral dilemma South wanted their property (runaway slaves) returned. Became a part of the Compromise of Need to settle the CA dispute.
North Got! Free State South Got! Fugitive Slave Law The citizens of each new territory would vote on whether to have slavery or not (Popular Sovereignty). Compromise of 1850 Slave trade abolished in Washington, D.C.
Federal law made it harder to help slaves escape. It was a federal crime to help runaway slaves. Do what is morally right? Face jailed & be fined? Obey federal law which upset abolitionists. Slaves must escape to Canada. Inflamed anti-slavery feelings in the North The Fugitive Slave Law, 1850
South Slavery here? Let the people decide! Popular sovereignty North Don’t let slavery expand into the new territories
Divided territory into Kansas and Nebraska Popular Sovereignty in Kansas—led to bloody 3 year civil war The people will get to vote if new states will be free or slave! Repealed the Missouri Compromise of 1820 Line—said NO slave states above 36 30
Popular Sovereignty will reign in Kansas The people will get to vote whether Kansas will be free or slave! Settlers in Kansas want to vote to become a free state. Pro slavery men from Missouri sneak into Kansas to vote to make Kansas a slave state. Violence erupts in Lawrence, Ks. 2 separate governments were created: a free govt. and a proslavery govt. John Brown- a nd extreme abolitionist. Brutally murdered 5 proslavery men!
Led to a mini Civil War in Kansas John Brown (abolitionist) leads murderous riots Pro-Slavery and Anti-Slavery groups fought a bloody 3 year civil war (“Bleeding Kansas”) Kansas enters as a Free State
AAbraham Lincoln was against slavery. HHe did not want slavery to expand into the new territories LLincoln-Douglas Debates— over popular sovereignty in the territories RRepublican Party f orms in the North