Fill - Free fillable of Slavery The Divisive Politics (Caggia Social Studies) PDF form

304 C

HAPTER 10

One American's Story

The Divisive Politics

of Slavery

South Carolina senator John C. Calhoun was so sick that he had missed

four months of debate over whether California should enter the Union

as a free state. On March 4, 1850, Calhoun, explaining that he was too

ill to deliver a prepared speech, asked Senator James M. Mason of

Virginia to deliver it for him.

A PERSONAL VOICE JOHN C. CALHOUN

“ I have, Senators, believed from the ﬁrst that the agitation of the

subject of slavery would, if not prevented by some timely and effec-

tive measure, end in disunion. . . . The agitation has been permitted

to proceed . . . until it has reached a period when it can no longer be

disguised or denied that the Union is in danger. You have thus had

forced upon you the greatest and the gravest question that can ever

come under your consideration: How can the Union be preserved?

”

—quoted in The Compromise of 1850, edited by Edwin C. Rozwenc

Senator Calhoun called on the North to give the South “justice, simple

justice.” He demanded that slavery be allowed throughout the territories

won in the war with Mexico. If it was not, he declared, the South would secede,

or withdraw, from the Union. Once again, the issue of slavery had brought about

a political crisis, deepening the gulf between the North and the South.

Differences Between North and South

Senator Calhoun argued that although the North and the South had been politi-

cally equal when the Constitution was adopted, the “perfect equilibrium”

between the two sections no longer existed. At any rate, the two sections certain-

ly had developed different ways of life by the 1850s.

INDUSTRY AND IMMIGRATION IN THE NORTH

The North industrialized

rapidly as factories turned out ever-increasing amounts of products, from textiles

and sewing machines to farm equipment and guns. Railroads—with more than

20,000 miles of track laid during the 1850s—carried raw materials eastward and

Terms & Names

MAIN IDEA

The issue of slavery

dominated U.S. politics in

the early 1850s.

U.S. society continues to be

challenged by issues of

fairness, equality, race, and

class.

WHY IT MATTERS NOW

▼

John C. Calhoun

was vice-

president under

John Quincy

Adams and

Andrew Jackson.

His last words

were: “The South.

The poor South.”

•Wilmot Proviso

•secession

•Compromise of

1850

•popular

sovereignty

•Stephen A.

Douglas

•Millard Fillmore

p0304-309aspe-0310s1 10/16/02 4:05 PM Page 304

Page 1 of 6

manufactured goods and settlers westward. Small towns like Chicago matured

into cities almost overnight, due to the sheer volume of goods and people arriving

by railroad. Telegraph wires strung along the railroad tracks provided a network

of instant communication for the North.

Immigrants from Europe entered the industrial workplace in growing num-

bers. Many became voters with a strong opposition to slavery. They feared the

expansion of slavery for two main reasons. First, it might bring slave labor into

direct competition with free labor, or people who worked for wages. Second, it

threatened to reduce the status of white workers who could not successfully com-

pete with slaves.

AGRICULTURE AND SLAVERY IN THE SOUTH

Unlike the North, the South

remained a predominantly rural society, consisting mostly of plantations and

small farms. The Southern economy relied on staple crops such as cotton. Though

one-third of the nation’s population lived in the South in 1850, the South pro-

duced under 10 percent of the nation’s manufactured goods. At the same time

that Northern railroad lines were expanding, Southerners were mostly using rivers

to transport goods. In addition, few immigrants settled in the South, because

African Americans, whether enslaved or free, met most of the available need for

artisans, mechanics, and laborers. Those immigrants who did settle in the South,

however, displayed signiﬁcant opposition to slavery. For example, German-

American newspapers in Texas and in Baltimore, Maryland published editorials

in favor of universal voting rights and freedom for African Americans.

The conﬂict over slavery rattled Southern society. In three Southern states,

Mississippi, Louisiana, and South Carolina, African Americans were in the major-

ity. In Alabama and Florida, African Americans composed almost half of the pop-

ulation. While blacks dreamed of an end to slavery, many Southern whites feared

that any restriction of slavery would lead to a social and economic revolution.

Furthermore, Calhoun warned that such a revolution would condemn blacks as

well as whites “to the greatest calamity, and the [South] to poverty, desolation,

and wretchedness.”

The Union in Peril 305

MAIN IDEA

Contrasting

List three

ways in which the

North and the

South differed in

the mid 1800s.

A. Answer The

North had an

industrial rather

than agricultural

economy; the

North mostly

opposed slavery,

while the South

relied on slave

labor; the North

had more urban

growth as well

as more growth

in immigrant

population.

History Through

GREEK REVIVAL ARCHITECTURE

The Greek Revival was an architectural style that spread throughout the United

States between 1825 and 1860. Like ancient Greek temples, many buildings

in this style had columns on all four sides. This style was applied to all types

of buildings in Greek Revival architecture, from small houses to state capitols.

The hot, humid climate of the South encouraged the development of a high

porch and with columns rising to the full height of a building.

These wide porches were unusual in the cooler climate

of Europe but well-suited to tropical regions. In the

hands of Greek Revival architects in the South, the

porches became grand living spaces where families

could ﬁnd shelter from the summer heat.

SKILLBUILDER

Interpreting Visual Sources

How would you be able to tell that this home is

an example of the Greek Revival style?

How did the architecture help cool the house?

SEE SKILLBUILDER HANDBOOK, PAGE R23.

Oak Alley Plantation, Louisiana

▼

p0304-309aspe-0310s1 10/16/02 4:05 PM Page 305

Page 2 of 6

Slavery in the Territories

On August 8, 1846, Pennsylvania Democrat David Wilmot heightened tensions

between North and South by introducing an amendment to a military appropri-

ations bill proposing that “neither slavery nor involuntary servitude shall ever

exist” in any territory the United States might acquire as a result of the war with

Mexico. In strictly practical terms, the Wilmot Proviso meant that California, as

well as the territories of Utah and New Mexico, would be closed to slavery forever.

THE WILMOT PROVISO

The Wilmot Proviso divided Congress along regional

lines. Northerners, angry over the refusal of Southern congressmen to vote for

internal improvements, such as the building of

canals and roads, supported the proviso. They also

feared that adding slave territory would give slave

states more members in Congress and deny eco-

nomic opportunity to free workers.

Southerners, as expected, opposed the proviso,

which, some argued, raised complex constitutional

issues. Slaves were property, Southerners claimed,

and property was protected by the Constitution.

Laws like the Wilmot Proviso would undermine

such constitutional protections.

Many Southerners feared that if the Wilmot

Proviso became law, the inevitable addition of new

free states to the Union would shift the balance of

power permanently to the North. The House of

Representatives approved the proviso, but the

Senate rejected it. Congressman Alexander H.

Stephens of Georgia issued a dire prediction.

A PERSONAL VOICE ALEXANDER H. STEPHENS

“ The North is going to stick the Wilmot amendment to every appropriation and

then all the South will vote against any measure thus clogged. Finally a tremen-

dous struggle will take place and perhaps [President] Polk in starting one war

may ﬁnd half a dozen on his hands. I tell you the prospect ahead is dark, cloudy,

thick and gloomy.

”

—quoted in The Coming of the Civil War

STATEHOOD FOR CALIFORNIA

As a result of the gold rush, California had

grown in population so quickly that it skipped the territorial phase of becoming

a state. In late 1849, California held a constitutional convention, adopted a state

constitution, elected a governor and a legislature, and applied to join the Union.

California’s new constitution forbade slavery, a fact that alarmed many

Southerners. They had assumed that because most of California lay south of the

Missouri Compromise line of 36˚30’, the state would be open to slavery. They had

hoped that the compromise, struck in 1820, would apply to new territories,

including California, which would have become a slave state.

General Zachary Taylor, who succeeded Polk as president

in 1849, supported California’s admission as a free state.

Moreover, he felt that the South could counter abolitionism

most effectively by leaving the slavery issue up to individual

territories rather than to Congress. Southerners, however,

saw this as a move to block slavery in the territories and as an

attack on the Southern way of life—and began to question

whether the South should remain in the Union.

California’s

admission to the

Union in 1850

increased

tensions between

North and South.

▼

306 C

HAPTER 10

Skillbuilder

Answer

About 63%.

MAIN IDEA

Analyzing

Motives

Explain why

Northerners

favored the Wilmot

Proviso and why

Southerners

did not.

B. Answer

Northerners

wanted to pre-

vent the expan-

sion of slavery

into the territo-

ries, because it

might cause

more slave

states to enter

the Union.

Southerners did

not want Con-

gress deciding

the issue of

slavery.

C. Answer

Although most

California voters

opposed slavery,

most of the state

lay south of the

Missouri

Compromise

line, and there-

fore legally

should have

been open to

slavery.

MAIN IDEA

Analyzing

Effects

Why did

California’s

application for

statehood cause

an uproar?

Members Members

Year from Free from Slave

States States

1800 77 65

1810 105 81

1820 123 90

1830 142 100

1840 141 91

1850 144 90

Source: Historical Statistics of the United States

SKILLBUILDER

Interpreting Charts

About what percentage of House members

represented free states in 1850?

Membership in

House of Representatives

p0304-309aspe-0310s1 10/16/02 4:05 PM Page 306

Page 3 of 6

The Senate Debates

The 31st Congress opened in December 1849 in an atmosphere of distrust and

bitterness. The question of California statehood topped the agenda. Of equal con-

cern was the border dispute in which the slave state of Texas claimed the eastern

half of New Mexico Territory, where the issue of slavery had not yet been settled.

In the meantime, Northerners demanded the abolition of slavery in the District

of Columbia, while Southerners accused the North of failing to enforce the

Fugitive Slave Act of 1793. As passions rose, some Southerners threatened

secession, the formal withdrawal of a state from the Union. Could anything be

done to prevent the United States from becoming two nations?

CLAY’S COMPROMISE

Henry Clay worked night and day to shape a compro-

mise that both the North and the South could accept. Though ill, he visited his

old rival Daniel Webster on January 21, 1850, and obtained Webster’s support.

Eight days later, Clay presented to the Senate a series of resolutions later called the

Compromise of 1850, which he hoped would settle “all questions in contro-

versy between the free and slave states, growing out of the subject of Slavery.”

TERMS OF THE COMPROMISE

Clay’s compromise (summarized on the chart

shown on page 308) contained provisions to appease Northerners as well as

Southerners. To satisfy the North, the compromise provided that California be

admitted to the Union as a free state. To satisfy the South, the compromise pro-

posed a new and more effective fugitive slave law.

Other provisions of the compromise had elements that appealed to both

regions. For example, a provision that allowed residents of the territories of New

Mexico and Utah popular sovereignty—the right of residents of a territory to

vote for or against slavery—appealed to both North and South. As part of the

compromise, the federal government would pay Texas $10 million to surrender its

claim to New Mexico. Northerners were pleased because, in effect, it limited slavery

in Texas to within its current borders. Southerners were pleased because the money

would help defray Texas’s expenses and debts from the war with Mexico.

Daniel Webster

strongly supported

Clay’s compro-

mise. He left the

Senate before

Stephen Douglas

could engineer

passage of all the

provisions of the

compromise.

Henry Clay

offered his

compromise to

the Senate in

January 1850.

In his efforts to

save the Union,

Clay earned the

name “the Great

Compromiser.”

John C. Calhoun

opposed the

compromise. He

died two months

after Clay

proposed it.

D. Answer

North: The ban-

ning of slavery

in California; the

restricting of

slavery in Texas

so that it would

not include New

Mexico.

South: A tougher

fugitive slave

law; money to

defray the costs

of the War with

Mexico. (Both

sides were

pleased by pop-

ular sovereignty.)

MAIN IDEA

Comparing

What

Northern issues

and Southern

issues were

addressed by the

Compromise of

1850?

307

p0304-309aspe-0310s1 10/16/02 4:05 PM Page 307

Page 4 of 6

On February 5, Clay defended his resolutions and begged both the North and

the South to consider them thoughtfully. The alternative was disunion—and, in

Clay’s opinion, quite possibly war.

A PERSONAL VOICE HENRY CLAY

“ And such a war as it would be, following the dissolution of the Union! Sir, we may

search the pages of history, and none so ferocious, so bloody, so implacable, so ex-

terminating . . . would rage with such violence. . . . I implore gentlemen, I adjure

them, whether from the South or the North . . . to pause at the edge of the precipice,

before the fearful and dangerous leap be taken into the yawning abyss below.

”

—quoted in Voices from the Civil War

CALHOUN AND WEBSTER RESPOND

Clay’s speech marked the start of one of

the greatest political debates in United States history. Within a month, Calhoun

had presented the Southern case for slavery in the territories. He was followed

three days later by Daniel Webster, who began his eloquent appeal for national

unity by saying, “I wish to speak today, not as a Massachusetts man, nor as a

Northern man, but as an American. . . . ‘Hear me for my cause.’” He urged

Northerners to try to compromise with the South by passing a stricter fugitive

slave law, and he warned Southern ﬁrebrands to think more cautiously about the

danger of secession.

A PERSONAL VOICE DANIEL WEBSTER

“ I hear with pain, and anguish, and distress, the word secession, especially

when it falls from the lips of those who are eminently patriotic. . . . Secession!

Peaceable secession! . . . There can be no such thing as a peaceable

secession. . . . Is the great Constitution under which we live . . . to be thawed

and melted away by secession. . . . No, sir! I will not state what might produce

the disruption of the states; . . . [What] that disruption must produce . . .

[would be] such a war as I will not describe.

”

—Seventh of March speech, quoted in The American Spirit

308 C

HAPTER 10

Skillbuilder

Answers

1. Calhoun

believed that

maintaining

states’ rights

was more

important than

preserving the

Union; Webster

believed the

reverse was

true.

2. The compro-

mise had strong

protections and

strong restric-

tions of slavery.

The Compromise of 1850

Calhoun’s Goals

Calhoun believed strongly in states’

rights over federal power and held the

interests of the slaveholding South as

his highest priority. He had long

believed that “the agi-

tation of the subject of

slavery would . . .

end in disunion.” He

blamed the sectional

crisis on Northern

abolitionists and

argued that the South

had “no concession or

surrender to make”

on the issue of

slavery.

Terms of the Compromise

• California admitted as a free state

• Utah and New Mexico territories

decide about slavery

• Texas-New Mexico boundary dispute

resolved; Texas paid $10 million by

federal government.

• The sale of slaves banned in the

District of Columbia. But slavery itself

may continue there.

• Fugitive Slave Act required people in

the free states to help capture and

return escaped slaves.

Webster’s Goals

Webster had argued with Northern

Whigs that slavery should not be

extended into the territories. Upon hear-

ing Calhoun’s threat of secession, he

took to the Senate ﬂoor

and endorsed Clay’s

compromise “for the

preservation of the

Union. . . . a great,

popular, constitution-

al government,

guarded by legislation,

by law, by judicature,

and defended by the

whole affections

of the people.”

SKILLBUILDER

Interpreting Charts

How did Calhoun and Webster disagree over states’ rights?

How did the compromise try to satisfy both sides?

p0304-309aspe-0310s1 10/16/02 4:05 PM Page 308

Page 5 of 6

Webster’s speech became one of the most famous in the

history of the Senate. The packed Senate chamber was

stunned to see longtime foes Clay and Webster ﬁnally—for

the ﬁrst and last time—on the same side.

THE COMPROMISE IS ADOPTED

The Senate rejected the

proposed compromise in July. Discouraged, Clay left

Washington. Stephen A. Douglas of Illinois picked up

the pro-compromise reins.

To avoid another defeat, Douglas developed a shrewd

plan. He unbundled the package of resolutions and reintro-

duced them one at a time, hoping to obtain a majority vote

for each measure individually. Thus, any individual con-

gressman could vote for the provisions that he liked and

vote against, or abstain from voting on, those that he dis-

liked. It appeared as though Douglas had found the key to

passing the entire compromise.

The unexpected death of President Taylor on July 9 aided

Douglas’s efforts. Taylor’s successor, Millard Fillmore,

made it clear that he supported the compromise. In the

meantime, the South was ready to negotiate. Calhoun’s

death had removed one obstacle to compromise. Southern

leaders came out in favor of Clay’s individual proposals as

being the best the South could secure without radical

action. After eight months of effort, the Compromise of

1850 was voted into law.

President Fillmore embraced the compromise as the

“ﬁnal settlement” of the question of slavery and sectional

differences. For the moment, the crisis over slavery in the

territories had passed. However, the relief was short-lived.

Even as crowds in Washington celebrated the passage of the

compromise, the next crisis loomed ominously on the hori-

zon—enforcement of the new fugitive slave law.

The Union in Peril 309

•Wilmot Proviso

•secession

•Compromise of 1850

•popular sovereignty

•Stephen A. Douglas

•Millard Fillmore

MAIN IDEA

2. TAKING NOTES

Create a chart similar to this one.

Complete it by indicating each

region’s position on an issue or

trend covered in this section.

How was each region affected by

the issue or trend?

CRITICAL THINKING

3. HYPOTHESIZING

Do you think there are any points at

which a different action or leader

might have resolved the conﬂict

between the North and the South?

Support your opinion with references

from this section. Think About:

• issues raised by the Wilmot

Proviso, California statehood,

and the Compromise of 1850

• constitutional issues raised by

Southerners

4. ANALYZING PRIMARY SOURCES

When California applied for

statehood in 1850, Mississippi

senator Jefferson Davis warned,

“For the ﬁrst time, we are about

permanently to destroy the balance

of power between the sections.”

Why might Davis have felt this way?

5. EVALUATING

Do you think the North or the South

won more signiﬁcant concessions in

the Compromise of 1850? Explain

your answer.

1. TERMS & NAMES For each term or name, write a sentence explaining its signiﬁcance.

Issue or Trend North South

MAIN IDEA

Analyzing

Effects

What was the

result of Douglas’s

unbundling of

Clay’s resolutions?

STEPHEN A. DOUGLAS

1813–1861

Stephen A. Douglas’s political

cleverness, oratorical skill, and

personal drive earned him the

nickname the Little Giant—a ref-

erence to the fact that he stood

only 5′4″ tall.

Using his political skill, Douglas

engineered the passage of the

Compromise of 1850 when all of

the efforts of senatorial warriors,

such as Clay, had failed. Douglas

later became the well-known

opponent of Abraham Lincoln in

both a senatorial and a presiden-

tial election.

Douglas had been a judge, and

then served two terms in the

House of Representatives before

he was elected to the Senate.

However, he never achieved

his ultimate political goal: the

presidency.

E. Answer The

compromise

passed because

each provision

had enough

support from

either the North

or the South to

pass when

voted on sepa-

rately.

p0304-309aspe-0310s1 10/16/02 4:05 PM Page 309

Page 6 of 6

Download
Save PDF to desktop

Email
Email completed PDF

Send for Signing
Email for others to sign

Print
Print document

NAME

of Slavery The Divisive Politics (Caggia Social Studies)

View Audit Log
Print With Audit Log
Duplicate Document

Fill Online, Printable, Fillable, Blank of Slavery The Divisive Politics (Caggia Social Studies) Form

Related forms

Fillable of Slavery The Divisive Politics (Caggia Social Studies)

Fill Online, Printable, Fillable, Blank of Slavery The Divisive Politics (Caggia Social Studies) Form

Related forms

First 20 documents completely FREE!