Presentation on theme: "Brief History of States Rights Prelude to confrontation Issue of NATIONALISM v. SECTIONALISM."— Presentation transcript:
Brief History of States Rights Prelude to confrontation Issue of NATIONALISM v. SECTIONALISM
WAS A CONFLICT BETWEEN NORTH AND SOUTH INEVITABLE? DOES THE CIVIL WAR REPRESENT A CLASH OF IDEOLOGIES? WHAT IS YOUR OWN POSITION ON THE ISSUE TODAY – STATE INDEPENDENCE, FEDERAL DOMINATION – OR COMBINATION
Articles of Confederation 1781 All but powerless Federal Government –Can not regulate trade –Can not create an Army & Navy Daniel Shays Rebellion Weak and ineffective government – not what the founders intended In immediate danger of failing after ONLY 8 years –Consequence of failure is that an experiment in LIBERTY would signal that representative democracies can not succeed.
1787 Philadelphia Convention New Document Written New Government Created Constitution of the United States Ratified 1789
Northwest Ordinance 1787 NO STATE northwest of the Ohio River could be a slave state –Not to benefit blacks but to prevent a shift in the balance of power in the Senate from northern dominance to southern dominance –Issue is one of politics NOT morality
Factors that united the states 2 Party Political System Market Economy –buying & selling Interstate Commerce Marshall Court decisions strengthened the federal government
Federalists (Whigs) v. Anti- Federalists (Democrats) Federalists – Alexander Hamilton – Government by the elite Anti-Federalists aka Jeffersonian Republicans – government by the little people
Market economy and Industrial Revolution is changing the U.S. Market economy increases economic growth Change: household system to factory system Banks provide $$ for investment S. & W. crops exchanged for N. manufactured goods
Transportation Revolution Roads – Cumberland Road Erie Canal – Buffalo & Lake Erie connected to NYC Railroads – B &O is nations first Steam Power – Fulton’s “Clermont”
Alien & Sedition Acts 1798 Passed by Adams and the Federalists Mostly dealt with immigrants but… One part of the act said that anyone who criticized the government could be fined or jailed President has power to imprison or deport foreigners Illegal to publish “false or malicious” writings about the United States
Who decided what you CAN and CAN NOT say? Does this put the idea of “free Speech” and the first amendment at risk? Is the NATIONAL / FEDERAL government becoming TOO POWERFUL? Republicans were outraged, said that it violates the first amendment
Virginia & Kentucky Resolutions 1798 State laws – states have the right to decide if Federal Laws exceed agreement between state and Federal government Claimed that if states decided that the Federal Govt. had exceeded its authority the state could ignore the law
Virginia & Kentucky Resolutions These 2 Resolutions become the basis upon which the “STATES RIGHTS” movement rests. The state and NOT the federal government will have the most control and the final word!
Missouri Compromise 1820 (compromise of 1820) To preserve balance of power between north and south in the Senate: Maine is admitted as a free state and Missouri is admitted as a slave state. It prohibited slavery in the former LOUISIANA TERRITORY north of the parallel 36*30” except within the boundaries of the proposed state of Missouri
Tariff of Abominations 1828 High tariff proposed to protect Northern Industrialists and Western interests. Non-industrial South heavily reliant on European manufactures is opposed. Debate continues for 2 years Seen as an attempt by the NORTH to impose its will on the SOUTH.
“Nullification Crisis” 1832 John C. Calhoun – tariff will be declared void in South Carolina President Andrew Jackson – asks for “Force Bill” – would allow him to use military against state of South Carolina Represents clash – President = Federal Power vs. State sovereignty
Provisions of Compromise of 1850 Texas gives up claims to New Mexico in exchange for U.S. taking over its STATE debt. California is admitted to the U.S. as a FREE STATE in exchange for… STRONG FUGITIVE SLAVE ACT –States had a duty to arrest anyone suspected of being a fugitive slave on no more evidence than a claimant's sworn testimony of ownership.fugitive slave –The suspected slave could not ask for a jury trial or testify on his or her own behalf. In addition, any person aiding a runaway slave by providing food or shelter was to be subject to six months' imprisonment and a $1,000 fine. –Slave trade banned in Washington D.C. (embarrassment internationally)