Unit 4 Flashcards
(18 cards)
What does the term “King Cotton” imply? How did this affect the development of the South?
King cotton was what people called the cotton production in the South because it was the biggest export. This lead to the South having a feeling of importance. This affected the development in the south because the demand for slaves skyrocketed, leading to them becoming more valuable and necessary. This lead to the south’s slave population to increase, more people/plantations had more slaves because of how labor intensive growing and maintaining cotton was. This also made the South more dependent on slaves so that their plantations could survive and thrive
What did the social structure of the Old South look like? What role did religion play in this structure?
The social structure of the Old South was the more slaves you owned the more wealthy you were and were on the higher status, but even the poor white men owned some slaves. There wasn’t really a middle class, it was more you were either poor or rich. However, a middle class did start to develop over the years, but very few people fell into that category. This was the social hierarchy: Plantation owners, small scale slave owners (own few slaves for servants), white non-slave owners, mountain whites (people who lived close to the Appalachian mountains (the weirdos who had different ways), free blacks, slaves.
How was slavery justified by various groups in the Old South?
People in the south who owned slaves said that the slaves were living a “good” and “provided” life and that they were treated very well. They would even say that they were content with their lives because they sang songs while working (mostly in plantations) and that they were given a home with food. This obviously wasn’t true because they were held against their will to serve their slave owners. They also sang songs to help them cope with the acceptance of the fact that they couldn’t leave and that they had to live the rest of their lives this way. They were also in family pictures and the slave owners said that the slaves were “part of the family” even though they had no other choice
What were the characteristics of slave life?
Slaves (field or non-field slaves) had to: Wake up early (before sunrise), slave road (where slaves would stay)
In-field slaves: Supervisors were always there paying attention to everything and making sure they didn’t do anything wrong otherwise they were beaten
Domestic slaves: Slaves who helped in the homes, In family portraits (bc they were “part of the family”)
Families were separated
Some Slaves who lived in plantations were living in poor conditions: they were given little food, hard bed in a poorly built shelter, they were beaten, families were separated, had to go to bed late and wake up early to work, if they didn’t pick enough cotton or do their jobs well they were beaten, if they didn’t follow the rules they were beaten
What attracted the American settlers to Texas, California, and Oregon (westward expansion)?
Texas
Cheap land- Mexico offered cheap or even free land to American settlers in the 1820s to populate the area
Agriculture- It had fertile land that could benefit the south for farming cotton
Expansion of slavery- southerners thought that they could expand slavery-based agriculture
Independence- when Texas gained independence from Mexico in 1836 the Americans were more intrigued because they wanted to take it over
California
Gold Rush- discovery of gold in Sutter’s Mill in 1848 which started the California Gold Rush which drew in many settlers (many northerners because they could leave their factories but southerners couldn’t really leave their plantations)
Fertile Land- the Central Valley had a lot of fertile farmland and agriculture
Economic Opportunities- the ports and cities in California promised trade, commerce, and industry opportunities
Oregon
Oregon Trail- made migration to Pacific Northwest accessible to settlers
Fertile Willamette Valley- this land was known for their fertile soil which was good for farming
Manifest Destiny- the belief in the US expansion to the Pacific Ocean motivated settlers to claim Oregon for the US
Escape from Economic Hardship- settlers wanted to escape overcrowding, economic struggles, and limited opportunities in the eastern US
What were the causes of the Mexican- American War? Evaluate the war and its outcomes
Causes
Annexation of Texas in 1845- or belief the US are entitled to take over Texas, which Mexico still claimed as their territory. This created tension and Mexico didn’t see Texas as independent until after the Texas Revolution in 1836
Boundary Disputes- US and Mexico disagreed on the southern boundary of Texas. The US claimed Rio Grande as the border but Mexico insisted it was the Nueces River which was further north
Manifest Destiny- Americans believed it was their right to expand the US across the continent and this caused them to want to take over Mexican territories like California and New Mexico
Slidell Mission (1845)- President James K. Pole sent John Slidell to negotiate the purchase of California and New Mexico for 25 million dollars but Mexico refused to meet with him which increased tension
Clash at the Rio Grande (1846)- Polk ordered US troops under General Zachary Taylor to go to the territory between the Nueces River and the Rio Grande. Mexican troops attacked and killed/wounded US soldiers. Polk used this to claim that Mexico had “shed American blood on American soil” leading Congress to declare war later on
Evaluation
Supporters- mainly expansionists and southerners and they viewed the war as a way to fulfill Manifest Destiny and secure territory. It was also seen as a display of the US military strength
Critics- including Abraham Lincoln and Henry David Thoreau, thought the war an acto of aggression and imperialism and accused Polk for provoking Mexico so he could expand slavery. Some people feared that adding new territories would make stronger sectional tension over slavery
Outcome of the War
Territorial Gains (Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo 1848)- Mexico ceded (gave up power over territory) a lot of land to the US including California, Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah, and parts of Colorado and Wyoming. The US paid 15 million for the territory (10 million less than their previous offer)
Expansion of Slavery Debate- the new territory left debates on if it would be slave states or not which contributed to tensions later leading to the Civil War
Impact on Mexico- Mexico lost about half of its territory and the war left Mexico politically destabilized and economically weakened for years
Strengthened US Power- The US now had continental power and access to the Pacific Ocean which opened new trade opportunities. The war also paved a way for future leaders like Zachary Taylor and Ulysses S. Grant
How did expansion and slavery affect the political parties (whigs, Democrats, Free Soilers)?
Whig Party
Divisions over Expansion and Slavery- Northern Whigs were often abolitionists or ant-slavery moderates, opposed the expansion of slavery to new territories and criticized the Mexican-American war as a pro-slavery land grab. Southern Whigs were more tolerant of slavery and supported expansion if it was in the souths interests
Erosion of Unity- The Compromise of 1850 and debates over the Kansas-Nebraska Act deepened internal divisions and Southern Whigs supported things like the Fugitive Slave Act which was very different than the Northern Whigs. In the mid 1850s the party fragmented with many Northern Whigs joining the Republican Party
Democratic Party
Pro-Expansion Policies- Democrats especially under leaders like James K. Polk were all about westward expansion driven by Manifest Destiny. They supported the taking over of Texas and the Mexican Cession (M giving up territory bc of US)
Slavery Role- southern democrats pushed for expansion of slavery in the new territories saying it was protected under the Constitution. Northern democrates were more divided because some supported popular sovereignty (allowing settlers to decide if a slave state or not) and others opposed slavery altogether
Sectional Tensions- The Kansas-Nebraska Act (1854), which appealed the Missouri Compromise and allowed popular sovereignty, made the southern democrats happy but not the northern democrats
Free Soil Party- started in 1848 and formed by anti-slavery democrats, northern Whigs and members of the Liberty Party and they opposed the extension of slavery into territories gained from Mexico
Platform- they weren’t really abolitionists but they didn’t want slavery to expand. The party thought that the western lands would be reserved for white free laborers which was both anti-slavery and racial motivations
Impact on Political Realignment- it was short lived but the Free Soil Party was a start of the Republican Party and it attracted anti-slavery Whigs and Democrats but contributed to the collapse of the Whigs
Political Realignment
Collapse of the Whigs- the Whig Party wasn’t able to have a healthy relationship with the northern and southern factions over slavery and this led to their extinction in the 1850s. Many Northern Whigs joined joined the anti-slavery Republican Party while the southern Whigs went toward the Dem or the Know-Nothing Party
Rise of Republican Party- it was formed in 1854 and united former Free Soilers, Northern Whigs, and Anti-slavery Dem and this platform didn’t support the expansion of slavery
Democratic Dominance in the South- Sectional tensions grew and the Dem party became increasingly associated with southern, proslavery interests increasing the North/South divide
What led to the rise of spirit of “Manifest Destiny” in the 1840s, and how did that spirit show itself in the American expansionism of the decade?
Nationalism and American Exceptionalism- belief that the US was destined to spread democracy, liberty, and Protestant Christianity fueled expansionist ambitions. Americans saw their country as a model for the world and they had a duty to extend their values
Economic Opportunities- pop growth in eastern U.S. made people want more land for farming and settling. The Panic of 1837 and economic hardships led them to look west for opportunities in agriculture, trade, and resource exploitation
Technological Advancements- steamboat, railroads, and the telegraph made westward expansion more easy to do
Demographic and Economic Shifts- big migration into the West changed the US economy because of increased agricultural and mineral production and establishing new markets
How was the “Manifest Destiny” of the 1840’s (particularly the expansion into Texas and Mexico) related to the sectional conflict over slavery?
Texas Annexation and the Expansion of Slavery
Texas as a Slave State- Texas had declared independence from Mexico (which had abolished slavery) in 1836 with American settlers from the south who brought enslaved people into the region and when the US took over Texas it was strongly supported by southerners and they viewed it as an opportunity to expand slavery
Northern Opposition- Many northerners opposed the annexation of Texas bc they feared it would tip the balance of power in the Senate in favor of slave slates and they also saw it as a way for the south to expand slavery which they didn’t support
Threat to the Balance of Power in Congress
Senate Balance- the expansion into Texas and Mexican Cession was a threat to disrupting the balance b/n free and slave states in the Senate and each side feared that the other would gain political dominance
Popular Sovereignty- as a compromise, some politicians like Senator Stephen Douglas proposed to allow settlers in a new territory to decide for themselves wether to permit slavery and this led to violent conflict (Kansas)
Impact on Sectional Conflict
Increased Polarization- the debates over the status of slavery in the new territories trained sectional divisions and made compromise hard
Breakdown of National Parties- Conflict over slavery and expansion weakened national political coalitions (alliances) like the Whig Party and contributed rise of sectional parties like Free Soil Party and Republican Party
Path to the Civil War- the territory gained by Manifest Destiny set the stage for major events like the Compromise of 1850 and the Kansas-Nebraska Act (1854) and “Bleeding Kansas” which pulled the north and south more apart
Was the Compromise of 1850 a “success”? By what standard?
Maintenance of Union Stability- the Compromise prevented immediate secession by southern states and delays the civil war by a decade. It allowed for continued debate and negotiation b/n the north and south which temporarily eased tensions. California’s admission as a free states strengthened the Union economically and strategically. It can be seen as a short-term success in maintaining national unity and avoiding immediate conflict
As a long term Failure
Resolving the Slavery Issue- the Compromise failed in settling the fundamental conflict over slavers expansion. The Fugitive Slave Act angered northerners bc they didn’t agree with it and they it fueled abolitionists sentiment. Popular sovereignty created confusion and conflict like “Bleeding Kansas.” By avoiding definitive resolution the Compromise only postponed the inevitable conflict over slavery (Civil War)
Sectional Perspectives
Northerners- thought it was a success that they got California as a free state but it tipped the senate balance toward free states. They thought it a failure because the Fugitive Slave Act was widely unsupported and against popular sovereignty
Southerners- they thought it a success because the Fugitive Slave Act was a major victory reinforcing southern rights. They thought it a failure because the admission of california and abolition of slave trade in DC were seen as concessions to the north creating resentment among southerners
What were the causes and consequences of the Kansas-Nebraska Act?
Because Stephen Douglas’s Kansas-Nebraska Act re-ignited the slavery issue after the Compromise of 1850, should he bear responsibility as an instigator of the Civil War?
How did the crisis events of the 1850’s help lead toward the Civil War?
Why did Douglas’s attempts to push the conflicts over slavery out of sight fail?
Could the Crittenden Compromise of some other proposal have prevented or at least postponed the Civil War?
How did the North and the South each vie the various event of the 1850’s
How strong were resistance movements of the slaves?
The resistance movements of the slaves were weak because they had thought that there was no other way out of slavery and they had accepted their fates of being slaves for the rest of their lives. However, there were a few little things they would do that helped them cope with being enslaved such as, singing songs because their songs had hidden messages that only they would understand. They would also misplace or damage tools and equipment which would slow productivity and they would get away with not doing as much work if the tools were needed. They would also fake illnesses to get out of working and they would work slowly too. Very few escaped and when they did it was a very careful, and secretive process because they couldn’t afford to get caught otherwise they would die and they either had to bring their family with and be way more careful and higher chances of getting caught or they had to leave them behind and for theses reasons it wasn’t a very popular choice. These small resistances obviously were met by beatings and/or other punishments but they did them anyways because it was all they could do.
John Tyler
He became president after William Henry Harrison died of hypothermia, was the vice president. Former democrat, but joined the whigs because he hated Andrew Jackson, however, didn’t really agree with the things that the whigs believed in, he had more democratic views.
The Whigs, led by Henry Clay, believed that there should be a National Bank because it would stabilize the economy, manage gov funds, and provide a reliable credit system (good credit/can pay back $). JT thought that it was a bad idea and he didn’t want to give the federal gov too much power and violate the states’ rights and he even vetos two bills on bringing the NB back.
The Whigs believed that there should be high protective tariffs (fees on foreign goods) to support American manufacturing/industries from foreign competition to promote economic growth and self-sufficiency. JT disagreed bc he thought it would benefit the Industrialized North more and hurt the Agricultural South, but he did sign the Tariff of 1842 but no more of the Whigs tariff policies.
The Whigs supported federal funding for internal improvements like roads, canals, and railroads, believing it would help the economy grow and connect with different parts of the country. TJ did not agree and thought it should be up to the states’ gov not the federal gov and vetos Whigs bills about the federal gov wanting to do internal improvements.
Whigs wanted a stronger federal gov to regulate the economy and infrastructure (facilities and systems serving the country). JT disagreed bc the constitution didn’t say they could do that and he didn’t want the states’ rights to be affected by the federal govs power.
Whigs were split on the topic of slavery but they prioritized economic issues over aggressive territorial expansion (would intensify slavery debate). JT was southern and a slave holder and more pro expansion and wanted to add more slave states so he pushed for taking over Texas (Whigs opposed bc they didn’t want to expand slavery)
