The Union in Peril Chapter 10

The Union in Peril Chapter 10
Causes, key events, and consequences leading to the CIVIL WAR

Is it possible to compromise on an ethical issue such as slavery?
The Union in Peril …the prospect ahead is dark, cloudy, thick and gloomy. Alexander H. Stephens …the greatest question that can ever come under your consideration: How can the Union be preserved? John C. Calhoun Peaceable secession!…there can be no such thing as a peaceable secession! Daniel Webster

A the conflict over how much independence states should have in the
“The slaveholding states will no longer have the power of self-government, or self-protection, and the federal government will become their enemy ”—South Carolina legislature, 1860 “The Union is older than any of these states, and, in fact, it created them as states.”—Abraham Lincoln, 1861 These quotes represent two sides in which important conflict in American history? A the conflict over how much independence states should have in the federal system B the conflict over what level of representation small states should have in the federal legislature C the conflict over an amendment to the Constitution that would allow slavery in the territories D the conflict over whether or not to forcibly remove Native Americans from their lands in the West A

Causes of the Civil War 1. Conflict over slavery in territories
2. Failure of Compromise in Congress— States Rights 3. Election of Lincoln as President 4. Secession of Southern states 5. Firing on Fort Sumter, South Carolina SLAVERY-On the eve of the American Civil War approximately 4 million enslaved African Americans lived in the southern region of the United States of America. The vast majority worked as plantation slaves in the production of cotton, sugar, tobacco, and rice. Very few of these enslaved people were African born principally because the importation of enslaved Africans to the United States officially ended in 1808, although thousands were smuggled into the nation illegally in the 50 years following the ban on the international trade. These enslaved people were the descendants of 12 to 13 million African forbearers ripped from their homes and forcibly transported to the Americas in a massive slave trade dating from the 1400s. -Economic differences b/t N and S would also play a role in the causes. CAUSES-Remember the S’s Slavery States Rights Secession Fort Sumter, South Carolina Remember the S’s & L!!!

Balance of Free and Slave States (1819)
Slavery in the Territories: The Missouri Question - Northerners were against adding Missouri to the union as a slave state because it would disrupt the balance of power in Congress between slave and free states. Illinois (1818) Alabama (1819) Indiana (1816) Mississippi (1817) Ohio (1803) Louisiana (1812) Vermont (1791) Tennessee (1796) Rhode Island Kentucky (1792) New York Virginia New Hampshire North Carolina Massachusetts South Carolina Connecticut Maryland New Jersey Georgia Pennsylvania Delaware Balance of Free and Slave States (1819) Remember this? Original 13 States Free States Slave States

Balance of Free and Slave States (1821)
Missouri Compromise Missouri was admitted to the union as a slave state, and Maine was admitted as a free state. Maine (1820) Missouri (1821) Illinois (1818) Alabama (1819) Indiana (1816) Mississippi (1817) Ohio (1803) Louisiana (1812) Vermont (1791) Tennessee (1796) Rhode Island Kentucky (1792) New York Virginia New Hampshire North Carolina Massachusetts South Carolina Connecticut Maryland New Jersey Georgia Pennsylvania Delaware Original 13 States Free States Slave States

• An imaginary line was drawn across the southern border of Missouri at the latitude 36 30'N.
36 , 30’

• Slavery was banned north of 36 , 30'N, except for Missouri.
• Slavery was allowed in the part of the Louisiana Purchase south of the 36 , 30'N. Sectionalism – loyalty to a state or section rather than to the whole country.

Ch. 10.1 Slavery in the Territories Wilmot Proviso – banned slavery in all territories Northern Congressmen voted for it Feared Southern control of Congress Southern Congress voted against it Undermine constitutional protection of property Feared loss of power in Congress would lead to laws ending slavery More tension builds b/t North and South… -As discussed earlier, The U.S. went to war with Mexico in Even before the war was over, it became clear slavery would be a problem. Victory over Mexico would mean new territories and the question of whether or not they should allow slavery. During this conflict, a Pennsylvania congressman named David Wilmot put forth what would become known as the Wilmot Proviso. This Proviso, or condition, proposed banning slavery from any land purchased from Mexico (New Mexico and Utah and California) Northerners embraced the idea—they were angry that Southern Congressmen had not supported internal improvements of building roads and canals and feared adding slave territories would give the South more power in Congress; Southerners did not like the Proviso b/c slaves were property Southerners claimed and property was protected under the constitution and also feared it would allow more free state in the union and have more say in Congress.. Congress eventually voted down the Proviso, still it stirred debate exposing the serious divisions over slavery that existed in the country. -The Wilmot Proviso- In 1846 Congress debated this bill that would ban slavery in the new territories acquired from Mexico. Northerners favored the bill. They felt that more slave states would give the South too much power. Southerners opposed the Proviso. They argued that they had the right to slaves in the new territories because slaves were property- and property was protected by the Constitution. The bill never passed.

Compromise of 1850: California applies for statehood and outlaws slavery South said this violated Missouri Compromise – threatened to secede Compromise: California admitted as free state Utah and New Mexico decide slavery issue by voting Popular Sovereignty-right of residents of a territory to vote for or against slavery. Sale of slaves banned in Washington, DC, but slavery itself may continue Fugitive Slave Act passed-North must return runaway slaves or be fined plus jail time -As a result of the gold rush, CA quickly had enough people to apply for statehood. In late 1849, CA had a constitutional convention and adopted a state constitution, elected a governor and a legislature, and applied to join the Union. Ca’s new constitution forbade slavery. This alarmed many Southerners because CA was below the Missouri Compromise line (36 30’) and should be open for slavery. -Another key piece of legislation was the Compromise of 1850 (By Henry Clay). The compromise admitted California to the Union as a free state and declared the unorganized western territories free as well. The Utah and Mexican territories were allowed to decide the issue by popular sovereignty-the will of the majority. The people living in these territories would vote whether or not to allow slavery. Attached to the compromise was the Fugitive Slave Law (later it was made the Fugitive Slave Act)-it required northern states to return escaped slaves to their masters in the South. But because the law was not popular with the North, many Northerners refused to obey it. Fugitive Slave Act: Fugitives were not entitled to a trial Could not testify in their own behalf Anyone who helped a fugitive could be fined $1,000…plus imprisonment.

Compromise of 1850

The second poster warns both fugitives and free blacks of possible cooperation between Boston’s law enforcement and the southern slave catchers known to be about the city.

Harriet Beecher Stowe & Dred Scott
2 important mile markers on the Road to the Civil War… After listening to the clip, be able to explain how they increased tensions between the North and the South. Write down your ideas in your notes. American History:The Civil War--North vs. South Dred Scott is in 10.4 Chose file “American History: The Civil War: A nation Divided”—then the clip NORTH vs. SOUTH” 4 mins long

Harriet Beecher Stowe Uncle Tom’s Cabin- anti-slavery book by Harriet Beecher Stowe Depicted the institution of slavery Caused many people to be sympathetic to the abolitionist cause In 1852, this book came out. It was banned in the South. It stirred whites in the North to the cause of abolition. The characters are stereotypes—they delivered the message that slavery was a great moral struggle. In the book, Uncle Tom, a kind and gentle slave, is beaten to death by Simon Legree, a wicked Northern slave owner who moved to the South. Another slave Eliza, flees across the frozen Ohio River with her infant son in her arms to escape him being sold into slavery. Northerners increased their pleas against the Fugitive Slave Act and slavery further sectionalizes the North and the South. Sold 300,000 copies in the first year 2 million in a decade!

Harriet Beecher Stowe (1811 – 1896)
So this is the lady who started the Civil War Abraham Lincoln

The Underground Railroad
=A series of secret passages leading from the South to Northern cities and Canada to help slaves escape from slavery Harriet Tubman- famous conductor in the underground RR. -Resisting the Fugitive Slave law/Act—Some northerners organized committees to help slaves get to Canada, and some Northern states passed personal liberty laws that forbade putting runaway slaves in prison and guaranteed they would have jury trials. They dragged the trials on for years to increase the slave catchers’ expenses. Southerners were enraged by the North’s resistance to the Fugitive Slave Act. -Also, during the Civil War period, a series of secret passages leading from the South to Northern cities and Canada was established to help slaves escape from slavery. These roads to freedom were referred to as the Underground Railroad. The heroic people who helped the slaves along these dangerous routes provided guidance, shelter, food, and clothing. Used secret tunnels, false cupboards. -There were many signals to prepare slaves for their journey. Songs were instrumental in the escape plans. Spirituals carried code language for enslaved Africans. In this one Wade in the Water, runaways are directed to go to the river. The water will cover the fleeing Africans’ scent and tracks to make it difficult for the bloodhounds to track them. The water also connects towns, cities, and states, leading the hearers to the conductor who will lead them to their next station or safe house. The song mentions three colors: red, white, and black. Fleeing Africans would look for someone wearing these colors at their next stop. -Harriet Tubman was one of the most famous conductors in the underground RR. She was born a slave in She was hit in the head with a lead weight by her slave owner as a young child. It caused her to lose consciousness several times a day. She escaped slavery in 1849 when her owner died by fleeing to Philadelphia. She decided to help other slaves by helping lead slaves on the Underground Railroad after the Fugitive Slave Act was passed. She made 19 trips, helped 300 slaves, including her own parents. None of the slavers were captured and sent back. She became an ardent speaker for abolition. -Traveling to the North on the URR was dangerous—on foot at night with no sense of direction except for the North Star and other natural signs. It meant avoiding armed patrols on horseback and struggling across forests and rivers. It meant going w/o food for days. -Wade in the Water song: Wade in the water Wade in the water children God’s gonna trouble the water. See the host all dressed in white God’s gonna trouble the water The leader look like the Israelite Another song: Steal Away: Steal away, steal away, steal away to Jesus! Steal away, steal away home, I have not long to stay here. My Lord calls me He calls me the thunder The trumpet sounds within my soul I have not long to stay here Song-Go Down Moses: When Israel was in Egypt’s land Let my people go Oppressed so hard they could not stand Go down Moses, “Way down in Egypt’s land, Tell old Pharaoh, Let my people go Go Down Moses Song---This was a call to let enslaved Africans know that an escape was planned. “Egypt’s land” refers to the plantation. “Israel” refers to the enslaved Africans. The number of verses sung indicated the number of passengers. Tour the Underground Railroad

Kansas Nebraska Act (1854) Look at the map on p. 314
Did away with the Missouri Compromise Let Kansas and Nebraska decide on the issue of slavery (popular sovereignty-people decide issue) -Abolitionists feelings in the North got worse when the issue of slavery in the territories –supposedly settled by the Compromise of 1850—surfaced again -On Jan 23, 1854, Senator Stephen Douglas introduced a bill in Congress to divide the area west of Iowa and Missouri into two territories: Nebraska and Kansa. He suggested the states be open to popular sovereignty for slavery—but the territories were above the 36 30’ line and would do away with the Missouri Compromise (said slavery to the North of line was banned) if it passed. -Bitter debate started in Congress over the issue. Some N congressmen saw the bill as part of a plot to turn the territories into slave states. But nearly 90% of Southern Congressmen voted for the bill. Douglass felt strongly about popular sovereignty—letting the people decide. -Kansas-Nebraska Act of Law that split Nebraska into the territories of Nebraska and Kansas and allowed for popular sovereignty there. Popular Sovereignty- Idea that people living in a territory should make their own decisions, especially the decision to admit slavery. This repealed the Missouri Compromise because these states were above the 36 30’ line. -All eyes turned westward to the fate of the new territories that hung in the balance,

Kansas-Nebraska Act, 1854 Kansas-Nebraska Act of Law that split Nebraska into the territories of Nebraska and Kansas and allowed for popular sovereignty there. Popular Sovereignty- Idea that people living in a territory should make their own decisions, especially the decision to admit slavery. This repealed the Missouri Compromise.

Violence Erupts in “Bleeding Kansas”
Read pp create a focus circle of information on the causes of conflict in Kansas… BE PREPARED TO SHARE WITH CLASS Bleeding Kansas

Focus Circle . Immigrants came looking for farms – mostly anti-slavery
Border ruffians from slave states – came just to vote for slavery . Settlers poured into the area bringing weapons, animals, seeds, and farm supplies to Anti-slavery groups Pro-slavery won a majority – set a pro-slavery gov’t in Lecompton to pass laws favoring slavery. Bleeding Kansas Anti-slavery group settled in Lawrence – Pro-slavery sheriff was sent to arrest town leaders – 800 men swept through Lawrence – burned buildings and arrested citizens Pottawatomie Massacre- John Brown – radical abolitionist – led revenge attack on 5 pro-slavers – set off more attacks – 200 people killed – people lived in fear Violence in the Senate

“Bleeding Kansas” Both slavery supporters and abolitionists rush into Kansas and set up rival gov’ts Armed clashes b/t the 2 sides common John Brown, the famous abolitionist, believed God called on him to end slavery “Pottawatomie Massacre”-John Brown and his people drug pro-slavery people from their beds, hacked off their hands, and stabbed them with broadswords In 1854, Congress passed the Kansa-Nebraska Act-allowed these states to vote and decide if they wanted to be free or slave states. -In March 1855, Kansas had enough settlers to hold a election for a territorial legislature. However, thousands of “border ruffians” from the slave state of Missouri crossed into Kansas (led by senator David Atchison) and with their revolvers cocked voted illegally and had a pro-slavery majority for their candidates, and set up a govt in Lecompton, passing pro-slavery acts. Furious anti-slavery settlers set up a rival govt in Topeka, Kansas in fall of 1855. -John Brown, believed that God had called on him to end slavery. Brown mistakenly believed that a pro-slavery mob had killed 5 antislavery people in Lawrence Kansas and was set on revenge. (Actually a pro-slavery mob in ant-slavery Lawrence, Kansas burned down the anti-slavery headquarters, destroyed 2 newspapers’ printing presses, and looted many houses and stores.) On May 24th, he and his followers pulled five men from their beds in the pro-slavery town of Pottawatomie Creek, Kansas, hacked off their hands, and stabbed them. Cries of revenge were heard everywhere for this event. It became the bloody shirt that pro-slavery Kansas settlers would use against the “Free Soilers”. This massacre triggered dozens of incidents throughout Kansas. Some 200 people were killed. People began calling this place Bleeding Kansas as it had become a battlefield in a civil war. -Brown will go on to raid Harper’s Ferry in Virginia. He will be hanged for treason in 1859.

Border “Ruffians” (pro-slavery Missourians)
“Bleeding Kansas” George S. Park, the founder of Parkville, Missouri, and owner of the Parkville Luminary newspaper, dared to speak out against the actions of the "Border Ruffians." As a result, they took revenge by breaking into the newspaper office and throwing the printing press into the nearby Missouri River. Border “Ruffians” (pro-slavery Missourians)

John Brown: Madman or Martyr?
In 1856, an abolitionist named John Brown murdered five proslavery men in Kansas The abolitionist John Brown lived in Osawatomie, Kansas Territory. Brown and his sons were responsible for the brutal murder of several proslavery men near Pottawatomie, Kansas. The men were called out of their homes at night and hacked to death with swords. This was just one of many incidents that earned Kansas Territory the name of "Bleeding Kansas.”

SEOCT ? Which of the following was a belief held by John Brown (1800–1859)? A Individual states should decide whether to permit slavery. B Abolitionists should work for gradual change. C The South should work to diversify its economic base. D Slavery should be abolished by violent means, if necessary. D

Violence in the Senate Pg. 316-317
Describe the Northern and Southern reactions to the incident between Charles Sumner and Preston Brooks.

Sen. Charles Sumner (R-MA) Congr. Preston Brooks (D-SC)
“The Crime Against Kansas” May 19, 1856—Charles Sumner (anti-slavery senator from Massachusetts) talked negatively about the writers of the Kansas-Nebraska Act and the Act itself (Stephen Douglas of IL and Andrew Butler of SC). He made fun of Andrew Butler’s proslavery beliefs and even his impaired speech. His speech went on for 2 days. A couple of days after the speech, Congressman Preston Brooks of SC , who had been insulted by Sumner’s speech because he was from the South and related to Andrew Butler (Brooks was his nephew), walked over to Sumner in Congress and beat him with a heavy cane, almost killing him. The attack caused Sumner to be absent from the Senate for 3 years while he recovered from his injuries. The Sumner-Brooks incident was a brutal example of how inflamed passions had become over slavery. On May 19, 1856, Senator Charles Sumner, a Massachusetts antislavery Republican, addressed the Senate on the explosive issue of whether Kansas should be admitted to the Union as a slave state or a free state. In his speech, Sumner identified two Democratic senators as the principal culprits in this crime—Stephen Douglas of Illinois and Andrew Butler of South Carolina. He characterized Douglas to his face as a "noise-some, squat, and nameless animal not a proper model for an American senator.” Sumner continued by mocking Senator Butler’s stance as a man of chivalry, charging him with taking "a mistress who, though ugly to others, is always lovely to him; though polluted in the sight of the world, is chaste in his sight—I mean” added Sumner, "the harlot, Slavery.” This incident will continue to show the widening gap of tensions b/t the North and the South. Sen. Charles Sumner (R-MA) Congr. Preston Brooks (D-SC) The cartoon shows Preston Brooks attacking Charles Sumner in the U.S. Senate chamber

Violence in the Senate

Slavery issue and Politics
Ch. 10.3 Slavery issue and Politics Whig Party-North opposed slavery – South left party. Know-Nothing Party - (American Party) – believed in nativism feared rising number of immigrants Free Soil Party – opposed the extension of slavery –appealed to Northern voters…. -In the mid-1850s, the issue of slavery and other factors split political parties and lead to the birth of new ones. -The Whig Party was split over the issue of slavery (between regional lines)-Remember the Whig Party came about when Democrats did not like Andrew Jackson’s politics). Northern, Southern Whigs split over slavery. -One alternative to the Whig Party was the Know-nothing Party or the American Party. This Party believed in Nativism=the favoring of natural born Americans over immigrants. They were at first a secret organization and used secret handshakes, etc and when questioned about their activities they were told to respond “I know nothing”. They formed the American Party in They also would split over the issue of slavery in the territories. Southern Know-nothings looked for a political party that was an alternative to the Democrats. Northern know nothings looked to the Republican Party. -One forerunner of the Republican Party was the Free Soil Party. In 1848 the Free soil party which opposed the extension of slavery in the territories chose former Democrat Martin Van Buren to be the nominee for President. Many Northerners were free soilers without being abolitionists. “It’s a party for keeping free soil and not setting men free”—William Lloyd Garrison

The Birth of the Republican Party…
1854 – former Northern Whigs and anti-slavery Democrats and Free Soilers formed new party opposed Kansas-Nebraska Act drew support from wide range of people-wanted to stop expansion of slavery in territories -The Democrat Party will still be for states rights, limited govt, and will be divided on slavery among regional lines. -The Republican Party forms in Mixture of people with one common goal-opposed slavery in the territories. They opposed the extension of slavery into territories. Northern Whigs join, anti slavery Democrats and free soilers. -Among its founders was Horace Greeley. -Wide range of people in Rep party: Some wanted to start the Missouri Compromise again, others were racial abolitionists.

Slavery and Secession P. 324 Personal Voice
Ch. 10.4 Slavery and Secession P. 324 Personal Voice “A house divided against itself cannot stand. I believe this government 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 it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing or all the other.” Abraham Lincoln 1858 speech while Lincoln was running for the Senate on the Republican ticket and was campaigning in Illinois. (lost to Dem Stephen Douglas)

Dred Scott V. Sandford: Dred Scott Decision - FACTS:
• Dred Scott was a slave from Missouri. (MO) 1856-Dred Scott Decision (Dred Scott v. Sandford)- Dred Scott was a slave who was briefly taken by his owner into free territory (Illinois and Wisconsin). They moved back to Missouri and his owner died. Scott claimed that residing in the free states made him a free man. Scott sued for his freedom. - In the Supreme Court decision stated that being in a free state did not make a slave free and slaves were not considered citizens. -The Court also ruled the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional because: Slaves were property, property was protected under the Constitution’s 5th Amendment, and Congress did not have the right to forbid slavery in the territories (Missouri Compromise) because this would be denying people their property and going against the Constitution. (Checks and Balances) -Court also ruled that Congress did not have the right to stop the spread of slavery. Dred Scott

Dred Scott Decision - FACTS:
• Scott and his owner moved to Wisconsin for four years. Dred Scott Decision (Dred Scott v. Sandford)- Dred Scott was a slave who was briefly taken by how owner into free territory. They moved back to Missouri and his owner died. Scott claimed that residing in the free states made him a free man. Scott sued for his freedom. - In the Supreme Court decision stated that being in a free state did not make a slave free and slaves were not considered citizens. -The Court also ruled the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional because: Slaves were property, property was protected under the Constitution’s 5the Amendment, and Congress did not have the right to forbid slavery in the territories (Missouri Compromise) because this would be denying people their property and going against the Constitution. (Checks and Balances) -Court also ruled that Congress did not have the right to stop the spread of slavery. Dred Scott

• Scott’s owner died after returning to Missouri. Dred Scott Decision (Dred Scott v. Sandford)- Dred Scott was a slave who was briefly taken by how owner into free territory. They moved back to Missouri and his owner died. Scott claimed that residing in the free states made him a free man. Scott sued for his freedom. - In the Supreme Court decision stated that being in a free state did not make a slave free and slaves were not considered citizens. -The Court also ruled the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional because: Slaves were property, property was protected under the Constitution’s 5the Amendment, and Congress did not have the right to forbid slavery in the territories (Missouri Compromise) because this would be denying people their property and going against the Constitution. (Checks and Balances) -Court also ruled that Congress did not have the right to stop the spread of slavery. Dred Scott

* Scott sued for his freedom. He claimed that he should be a free man since he lived in a free territory (WI) for four years. Dred Scott Decision (Dred Scott v. Sandford)- Dred Scott was a slave who was briefly taken by how owner into free territory. They moved back to Missouri and his owner died. Scott claimed that residing in the free states made him a free man. Scott sued for his freedom. - In the Supreme Court decision stated that being in a free state did not make a slave free and slaves were not considered citizens. -The Court also ruled the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional because: Slaves were property, property was protected under the Constitution’s 5the Amendment, and Congress did not have the right to forbid slavery in the territories (Missouri Compromise) because this would be denying people their property and going against the Constitution. (Checks and Balances) -Court also ruled that Congress did not have the right to stop the spread of slavery. Dred Scott

Results of Dred Scott Case:
Scott was not a citizen Living in a free territory didn’t make a slave free Congress had no right to outlaw slavery because slaves were property protected under 5th Amendment….Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional South saw it as clearing the way for the extension of slavery in all territories. Northerners now turned to the Republican Party as a way to keep slavery in check. Scott was not a citizen and could not sue in court, living in a free territory did not make a slave free, and Congress had no right to outlaw slavery because it would be denying personal property (5th Amendment) -Slaves were property, property was protected under the Constitution’s 5th Amendment. -Congress did not have the right to forbid slavery in the territories (Missouri Compromise) because this would be denying people their property and going against the Constitution. (Checks and Balances) -Court also ruled that Congress did not have the right to stop the spread of slavery. -Roger B. Taney was the Supreme Court Chief Justice -Sectional passions erupted with the verdict. The South cheered. The North was stunned. By striking down the Missouri Compromise, the Supreme Court had cleared the way for extension of slavery everywhere. Opponents of slavery now put their hopes in the Republican Party. If the Republicans became strong enough, they could still keep slavery in check. Dred Scott’s original name was Sam Blow. After the Supreme Court ruled against Scott in 1854, Scott was sold to a son of his original owner and was freed instantly. Scott died of tuberculosis in 1858.

• Dred Scott was not given his freedom.
RESULTS: • Dred Scott was not given his freedom. • The Missouri Compromise was found to be unconstitutional. Open to slavery through popular sovereignty (Compromise of 1850) Open to slavery through popular sovereignty (KS-NE Act) Remember the 1820 Missouri Compromise applied to statehood—Northern states slavery was banned, southern states ok. -The territories could decide on slavery through popular sovereignty. -Comp of 1850 allowed CA in as a free state, the two terr of Utah and N Mexico could decide on the issue by vote. -Kan-Neb Act of 1854 allowed Kan and Neb territories to choose if they wanted slavery and repealed the Missouri Compromise. -Now the states to the north can become slave states. Congress can not outlaw slavery anywhere because they would be denying personal property. Missouri Compromise line is declared unconstitutional (Dred Scott Decision)

Rise of Abraham Lincoln
A House divided against itself, cannot stand Rise of Abraham Lincoln Compare/Contrast pp Abraham Lincoln Stephen Douglas (These next three slides are optional) The 1858 race for the U.S. Senate was b/t Republican Abraham Lincoln and Democrat Stephen Douglas. Douglas was a two term senator and who was Lincoln? A well educated man, successful lawyer and politician. -Tell about these two men and their debates as they ran for the Senate.

Lincoln….. Self educated Served one term of Congress Republican
Spoke in plain language Believed slavery was immoral Believed that slavery had to be ended by Congress Did not believe that Popular Sovereignty would work Did not believe in punishing the South during Reconstruction Was an excellent politician and leader Did not believe in the equality of white and black races, but also did not want slavery to spread and was wrong.

Douglas Two terms in Senate Democrat Well educated
Believed in popular sovereignty Believed that slavery would die out eventually Freeport Doctrine – if slavery is legal in the territory – then elect people who will not enforce slavery laws.

John Brown’s Raid on Harpers Ferry….1859
John Brown led raid on arsenal U.S. troops attacked Brown’s group Brown arrested – tried for treason and hanged… Read the account of the raid on p -Why did Harpers Ferry increase tensions between the North and the South? If 1858 was a year of talk, then 1859 was a year of action. “God’s Angry Man” John Brown reemerged on the scene and ended all hopes of a compromise over slavery b/t the North and the South. -In Oct 1859 a group of radical led by abolitionists (21 men, black and white) led by John Brown attacked the federal arsenal (location where the weapons are kept) at Harper’s Ferry, Virginia (now West Virginia). He hoped to seize weapons and give them to slaves who could then use them to rise up in an armed rebellion. -60 of the towns wealthiest citizens were held hostage by Brown who hoped their slaves would join the insurrection. No slaves came forward. Local troops killed 8 of Brown’s men. -Their plan failed when US marine troops under the command of Colonel Robert E. Lee surrounded the arsenal and forced Brown’s surrender. The marines killed 2 more of his men. Although Brown was hanged, his actions intensified southern resentment of the abolitionist movement and many saw it as proof that the South would have to protect its way of life.

John Brown’s Raid on Harper’s Ferry, 1859
-John Brown- Fierce opponent of slavery who led a raid that killed five proslavery people in Kansas. This killing triggered dozens of violent actions throughout the territory. About 200 people were killed.. Because of the violence on both sides, the territory was nicknamed Bleeding Kansas. ---- -Brown will go on to raid Harper’s Ferry in Virginia. He will be hanged for treason in 1859. -Many Northerners viewed Brown as a martyr for the slaves cause. Southerners viewed Brown’s raid as proof that Northerners were plotting the murder of slaveholders. John Brown: Madman or Martyr?

Lincoln and the Election of 1860
Republican Abraham Lincoln runs for president South feels threatened b/c Lincoln feels slavery is morally evil N. Democrats – Stephen Douglas S. Democrats – John C. Breckingridge Constitutional Party – John Bell -In 1860 Lincoln ran on the Republican ticket for president. The South felt threatened because Lincoln felt slavery was morally wrong/evil. -Dem’s spilt over the issue of slavery—N Dem select Stephen Douglas and his doctrine of popular sovereignty. S Dem back VP John C. Breckinridge of Kentucky. -Former Know-nothings and Whigs from the South and moderate Northerners organize the Constitutional Union Party—ignored slavery issue altogether-nominated John Bell of TN.

1860 Presidential Election
√ Abraham Lincoln Republican John Bell Constitutional Union 1860 Presidential Election -It was a close race. -Lincoln defeated Douglas in the North -Breckinridge carried most of the South -Because the North had a high pop than the South, Lincoln won the election. Stephen A. Douglas Northern Democrat John C. Breckinridge Southern Democrat

Map of 1860 Election Electoral Vote Popular Vote
---Results on p. 330 How did the election of 1860 reflect the political divisions in the US? Electoral Vote Popular Vote -Lincoln , 865, 593 -Breck , 356 -Bell , 906 -Douglas 12 1, 382, 713

1860 Election Results

Results of 1860 Election….Southern Secession
Lincoln’s victory convinces South that they have lost their political power. S.Carolina secedes (withdraws) from the Union followed by several other states 1861 – formed the Confederate States of America (Confederacy) Elected Jefferson Davis – President Question: Would the North allow the South to leave without a fight? -The Southern states fear Lincoln would not only try to prevent slavery in the territories but also to do away with it in the South. -When Lincoln won the election, SC responded by seceding or withdraws from the union on Dec. 20, (Before Lincoln takes office in 1861) -Within 2 months, 6 other states had seceded as well: Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, Louisiana, and Texas -These states meet in Montgomery Al, and elect a president of the new Confederate States of America-Jefferson Davis. A Georgian, Alexander Stephens, was elected as their VP. The Civil War began a few months later when Confederate forces fired on Union troops at Fort Sumter, SC. -Richmond VA becomes the capital of the Confederacy.

1860 Election: A Nation Coming Apart?!

Secession!: SC Dec. 20, 1860

March 1861 At Lincoln's inauguration on March 4, the new president said he had no plans to end slavery in those states where it already existed, but he also said he would not accept secession. He hoped to resolve the national crisis without conflict. Just show this—not in notes

The Union in Peril Chapter 10

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "The Union in Peril Chapter 10"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

The Union in Peril Chapter 10

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "The Union in Peril Chapter 10"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback