Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

The Civil War. States Rights vs Federal Rights States Rights (South) – Believes the federal gov’t works for them – Could declare laws null and void –

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "The Civil War. States Rights vs Federal Rights States Rights (South) – Believes the federal gov’t works for them – Could declare laws null and void –"— Presentation transcript:

1 The Civil War

2 States Rights vs Federal Rights States Rights (South) – Believes the federal gov’t works for them – Could declare laws null and void – Had the right to secede Federal Gov’t Rights (North) – Federal gov’t has some power over the states (delegated and implied powers) – Supreme Court was the only body to decide if laws were unconstitutional – No state had the right to secede. Senator Daniel Webster (MA), “If a state had the right to secede, the union would be no more than a rope of sand.”

3 Origins of States Rights The Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions – Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 >protect the US gov’t from anarchy (French Revolution)…meant to keep wealthy Federalists in power – James Madison and Thomas Jefferson convinced Virginia and Kentucky to pass resolutions saying: 1- federal gov’t works for the states, 2- declare Alien and Sedition Acts null and void – Jefferson becomes President in 1800 > Alien and Sedition Acts get repealed by a Democratic- Republican Congress – States Rights issue is not resolved

4 Tariff Issue 1828> protective tariffs known as Tariff of Abominations (believed to benefit North) – Protested by South Carolina (Vice President John C. Calhoun from South Carolina – 1832> South Carolina passes Ordinance of Nullification> Declares tariff law null and void in South Carolina

5 Tariff Issue President Andrew Jackson pledges to use military to enforce Tariff law….”nullification was incompatible with the existence of the Union.” Both sides threatened to stand strong

6 Tariff Issue Outcome: – Congress passes Compromise Tariff of 1833 Significant reduction in tariff South Carolina withdraws Ordinance but still proclaims power to nullify federal laws Issue that is still unresolved…….State’s rights – more power Federal vs. States

7 Sectionalism Antebellum South (phrase to describe rebellious South) support state’s rights to protect sectional interests North vs. South (West mixed) North believed what was good for one was good for all – Problem= North and South are different (industry/agriculture)

8 Sectional Disputes 1.Protective Tariff - good for the North and bad for the South - fear of retaliation against exportation of cotton 2.Internal Improvements - good fro the North and West and bad for the South - more Western products shipped to the North - but everyone pays 3.Cheap land in the West > $1.25 an acre - West> good because it would lead to expansion of the West - North> bad because it would take away workers - South> good & bad because it would lead agriculture (expansion of slavery) but could lead to less representation in House

9 Sectional Disputes 4.Expansion of Southwest - West> good because it would open up more cheap land to develop - North> bad because it would open up land to the expansion of slavery> more power in Congress for slavery supporters - South> good because it would allow for expansion of slavery and growth of “King Cotton” 5.Expansion of Slavery - North> against because of abolitionism - South> in favor of because of more representation in Congress = more power to fight tariffs and more opportunity to keep slavery around

10 Politics Leading to War 1854 – The Whig Party splits over the Kansas-Nebraska Act Northern Whigs vs. Southern Whigs – Democrats also split over K-N Act Northern Democrats rebel against party – Many Northern Dems and Northern Whigs form the Republican Party > a sectional party with no support from South Whig Party disappears Republicans vs. Northern Democrats vs. Southern Democrats

11 Politics Leading to War 1856 – The Sumner-Brooks Affair – Charles Sumner (D-MA) spoke out against slavery and “The Crime Against Kansas” in a speech in the Senate Remarks against the South and specifically Senator Butler (D-SC and co-author of K-N Act) – 3 days later Representative Preston Brooks (D-SC and Butler’s nephew) enters the Senate and beats Sumner over the head with a cane on the Senate floor Said he was “upholding Southern honor” - Sumner in a coma for 6 months and out of the Senate for 2 years…MA doesn’t replace him as symbol of a Southern brutality

12 Politics Leading to War Abe Lincoln – He was not abolitionist although he hated slavery – He believed that a black man could never live on equal terms in a white society – Propsoed that a freed slave be colonized in South or Central America

13 Politics Leading to War Lincoln-Douglas Debates – Ran against each other for the US Senate in 1858 (and again for President in 1860) Douglas a Democrat and Lincoln a Republican “I believe this gov’t cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved; I do not expect the House to fall; But I do expect that it will cease to be divided. It will become all on thing or all the other.” – Abe Lincoln

14 Politics Leading to War Lincoln and Douglas hold a series of debates throughout Illinois – Lincoln makes it known that he hopes to confine slavery to where it exists and let it die a slow, natural death – In the debate in Freeport Lincoln corners Douglas He asked, “Can people of a US territory in any lawful way exclude slavery from its limits prior to the formation of a state?” They cannot because of Supreme Court decision in Dred Scott but it was a no win for Douglas Douglas’ answer was careful and calculated Becomes known as the Freeport Doctrine – “if voters are against slavery, they could pass slave codes that were needed for existence (popular sovereignty without going against Dred Scott) Made people of Illinois happy but he lost support of the South (viewed as allowed slavery to be abolished) Douglas won the Senate election> lost 1860 Presidential election but big winner was Lincoln.

Download ppt "The Civil War. States Rights vs Federal Rights States Rights (South) – Believes the federal gov’t works for them – Could declare laws null and void –"

Similar presentations

Ads by Google