outbreak of war Flashcards
(15 cards)
blundering generation
knowledge
Steven Douglas’ handling of the Kansas – Nebraska act significantly impacted the relationship between the Northern and the Southern states, which inevitably pushed the lower Southern states towards secession. The Kansas – Nebraska act of 1854 introduced by Senator Steven Douglas aimed to apply the principle of popular sovereignty to the newly formed territories of Kansas and Nebraska.
blundering generation
analysis
The act was highly controversial as Nebraska was still a part of the Louisiana Purchase, which caused issues as it contradicted the Missouri Compromise of 1820, which had previously kept slavery out of those territories and meant that all the new states in the territory would enter the Union as free states.
Douglas believed that by allowing these territories to decide their own stance on slavery, he was not giving anything away and merely was addressing Southern interests.
blundering generation
evaluation
To evaluate, it can clearly be argued that a “Blundering Generation” of politicians had played a significant role in the outbreak of the Civil War of 1861. Steven Douglas’ Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 resulted in a violent conflict in Kansas and further deepened the divide between the North and South, pushing the lower Southern states towards secession and eventually war. Whilst his proposal of popular sovereignty did intend to satisfy both sides, only intensified violence, and conflict within the Union, this can clearly be seen in events such as “Bleeding Kansas” and the violent attack on Senator Sumner.
slavery knowledge 1
As part of the Compromise of 1850, the Fugitive Slave Act was passed to placate the South, which introduced much harsher rules.
Escaped enslaved people weren’t allowed to testify, have a trial by jury, or use habeas corpus.
They had to prove their freedom but were given no legal way to do so.
U.S. Marshals had to help capture fugitives or face a $1,000 fine, and they could force regular citizens to help.
The government paid the costs of returning enslaved people, and within 15 months, 84 had been sent back to slavery.
slavery analysis 1
This further caused uncommon sectional tension as the North had already responded to the the 1793 Fugitive Slave Act by passing personal liberty laws which gave fugitives the rights of testimony, habeas corpus and trial by jury or imposed criminal penalties for kidnapping.
The Fugitive Slave Act highlighted the moral and legal divide between the North and the South, further intensifying the conflict surrounding the issue of slavery and slave expansion. Furthermore, it caused friction within both the Whigs and Democrats as both parties struggled to reconcile their party platforms with their personal beliefs on slavery.
Abolitionists were appalled, as for example Congressman Joshua Giddings stated: “let the president … drench our land of freedom in blood.”
slavery knowledge 2
the dred scott case was welcomed as a test case by pro slavery elements which aimed to answer consitiutional questions of the legal status of slaves.
he was a slave that sued for his freedom on the grounds that he had lived in free state land.
scott was not considered a us citezen as black people were not “sovereign people” who made the constituion
slavery analysis 2
Most Northerners were horrified at the majority decision.
Some thought that Southerners were foreshadowing the expansion of slavery into the free states.
Many believed it could be seen as an attempt to outlaw the Republican Party since it was fully dedicated to keeping slavery out of the territories.
It seemed concrete evidence of the slave power conspiracy at work.
Taney was seen talking with Buchanan on his inauguration day which led to Seward and Lincoln using this as evidence whilst Republicans argued that Buchanan knew the Supreme Court’s decision before asking Americans to accept it.
slavery evaluation
The Fugitive Slave law increased sectional tension as the constitution was in a position to state that slave owners had the right to recover their property, enslaved people, however did not specify how the provision should be enforced.
The law was controversial and further deepened the divide between the North and the South. As the act strengthen slave owner’s rights, they by required Northern states to help capture and return the fugitives.
2nd party system
knowledge 1
Until around 1850, American politics had been based on a system of compromise with what was known as the 2nd party system, where Whigs and Democrats competed for votes. However, during the 1850s, America grew to be a country of sections divided by party loyalty and partisan views emerged on issues such as the extension of slavery into new territories and tariffs. This division ultimately resulted in the breakdown of the 2nd party system and the emergence of a new political party called the Republicans.
By the midterm elections, the Whig Party had effectively ceased to be a significant political force in many Northern states, as newer parties had emerged attracting mass support.
This led to the demise of the Whigs and weakened Democrat loyalties throughout the North, further making the second party system unstable. The growing sectional tensions, especially after the Kansas - Nebraska Act divided and set Northern and Southern Whigs against each other. In addition, there were other factors that led to the Whig’s failure before Kansas – Nebraska, as in the early 1850s, the Whigs had done poorly both nationally and at state level.
2nd party system
analysis 1
Historians such as William Gineapp argue that the main problem confronting both the Northern Whigs and Democrats at a local level in the early 1850s was not the issue of slavery but rather the rise of ethnocultural issues. During the 1852 election, the Whigs were actively pro-Catholic to secure the growing immigrant vote. However, the strategy failed as it alienated voters of the Whigs’ traditional base whilst only managing to draw in a few numbers of immigrant votes. Additionally, traditional Whig voters chose to stay at home rather than vote for a party which seemed to be trying to appease Catholics. Ultimately, the Whigs’ demise not only marked the end of their own influence but also contributed significantly to the breakdown of the Second Party System, which would lead to the civil war.
2nd party system
knowledge 2
The rise of the Know Nothing Party was a crucial factor in the breakdown of the Second Party System, which ultimately contributed to the political instability leading up to the Civil War. The party emerged from fears over Catholicism and immigration, as their rapid rise was driven by a huge increase of immigrants between 1845 and 1854— withover three million people, largely Irish and German Catholics—sparking widespread Protestant resentment. Catholic influence was seen as a threat to traditional American values, especially as the number of Catholic bishops, priests, and churches nearly doubled between 1850 and 1854.
In cities like Boston, the immigrant vote grew by 195% in just five years, compared to a 14% rise among native-born voters. Since most Catholic immigrants supported the Democratic Party, which opposed temperance laws and immigration restrictions, many native-born Protestants felt their political power and national identity were under threat. The Know Nothings capitalised on this resentment by calling for strict immigration policies, limiting office-holding to native-born citizens, and enforcing a 21-year waiting period for citizenship.
By 1854, with over a million members, they gained real political power, implementing nativist measures like literacy tests and banning foreign language education in Massachusetts.
2nd party system
analysis 2
The Know Nothings had won massive support in the North as the party was able to exploit both anti–slavery and nativist issues.
However, by 1856, in order to maintain its position as a national party, the Know Nothings would have to drop its anti–Kansas–Nebraska position and by doing so it would lose Northern support, thus began their downfall.
The decline of immigration also affected the party, during the mid-1850s immigration fell to under half the level it had been in the early 1850s, which therefore resulted in a decline of nativism.
Furthermore, the Know Nothing’s failure to deliver campaign promises, secretive nature and bully-boy tactics also contributed to its decline and the rise of the Republican Party.
economic differences and sectionalism
knowledge
Even before the Civil War, the South’s economy was much weaker in contrast to the North’s. Whilst the North was becoming more industrial, the South remained reliant on an agrarian economy which was dependent on slave labour.
As despite having 30% of the U.S. population, the South produced only 10% of manufactured goods and had fewer financial resources—holding only 30% of national wealth, 12% of circulating currency, and 21% of banking assets.
economic differences and sectionalism
analysis
the North was far more urbanisssed and had a more diverse population due to mass immigration between 1830 and 1860 with five million immigrants settling into Northern states. By 1860, one in six Northerners was foreign-born, compared to one in 30 in the South.
In contrast, the South had very few large cities, with only one major urban area, New Orleans, and had limited infrastructure for economic growth.
economic differences and sectionalism
counter analysis
George Fitzhugh and J.D.B. DeBow argued that the South’s agrarian economy produced enough resources for its population and that wealth was more evenly distributed than in the North. Non-slaveholders, they claimed, earned better wages and had better employment conditions than Northern workers, with opportunities to climb the social ladder by becoming slaveholders. Southern labourers were seen as avoiding the poverty and harsh conditions common in Northern cities and Europe.
