Component-4

.docx

School

Sam Houston State University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

3336

Subject

History

Date

Jan 9, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

20

Uploaded by salazar021411

Report
Component 4 [Worth up to 90 points] Download the document. Answer the questions. Upload to Blackboard. Readings: I: Read the Russell Text: Pages 77-94 II: Causes of the Civil War: Division and Growth Reform Movements https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=2&psid=3533 Summarize the Temperance Movement Many middle-class women blamed alcohol for the abuse of wives and children and the squandering of family resources, and many businesspeople identified drinking with crime, poverty, and inefficient and unproductive employees. The first formal national temperance organization (the American Society for the Promotion of Temperance) was born in 1826 which called for total abstinence from distilled liquor. By 1835 an estimated of 2 million Americans had taken the “pledge” to abstain from hard liquor. Between 1830 and 1860, nearly 2 million Irish arrived in the United States along with additional hundreds of thousands Germans. in 1840, two new approaches to the temperance movement arose, the first being that the Washington movement in which reformed alcoholics sought to reform other drinkers. and the second being a campaign to restrict the manufacture and sale of alcohol, culminating in the adoption of the nation’s first statewide prohibition law in Maine in 1851. Women’s Suffrage https://www.history.com/topics/womens-history/the-fight-for-womens-suffrage What is Women’s Suffrage? The women’s suffrage movement was a decades-long fight to win the right to vote for women in the United States and it took activists and reformers nearly 100 years to win that right. What is the Amendment that gives women suffrage? In august 18, 1920, the 19th amendment to the Constitution was finally ratified, enfranchising all American women and declaring for the first time that they all deserve the rights and responsibilities of citizenship.
Abolition https://www.history.com/topics/black-history/abolitionist-movement What does Abolition mean? Abolition is the action or act of ending a system, practice, or institution which in this case it was an organized effort to end the practice of slavery in the United States during the 19th century. What were the issues on each side of abolition? Abolitionists saw slavery as an abomination and wanted to free slaves. Critics of nation-wide abolition argued that the option of slavery should be left up to individual states. Slavery: https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/era.cfm?eraID=6&smtid=1 After reading this, why would you suppose slavery was so difficult to correct? The slave trade and slave labor contributed greatly to the economics of the United States. Cotton accounted for over half of the US exports and the backbreaking work of growing and harvesting cotton was performed by slaves. Many leaders and famous people owned slaves, even if they were opposed to it in theory. Nation Breaks Apart https://www.dropbox.com/s/quoq8u1zcccj03k/zChapter%2015%20Sec%201.pdf?dl=0 List at least 3 reasons for the growing differences between the North and the South The North began to develop more industry and commerce in the 1800s, while the Southern economy relied on plantation farming. Plantation farmers invested in slaves and profited from their labor, however only wealthy planters prospered. The North experienced rapid economic growth due to investments in industry and investments in railroads and canals. Free workers in the north may have felt threatened by slaves who did not earn wages. They feared the expansion of slavery might force workers out of their jobs or into slavery. What were the issues behind the Compromise of 1850 and what effect did the Compromise of 1850 have on keeping the war away? California wanted to be admitted into the union as a free state, but that would upset the balance of power in congress between the free states and the slave states. To please the Northern states, California would be admitted as a free state and the slave trade would be abolished in
Washington, D.C. To please the South, Congress would not pass laws regarding slavery for the rest of the territories won from Mexico and would pass stronger laws to help recapture runaway slaves. The Compromise of 1850 did not prevent a war. Despite its intentions, sectional tensions continued to rise. The Fugitive Slave Act The 1850 law to help slaveholders recapture runaway slaves was called the Fugitive Slave Act. People accused of being fugitives under this law could be held without an arrest warrant. In addition, they had no right to a jury trial. Instead, a federal commissioner ruled on each case. The commissioner received five dollars for releasing the defendant and ten dollars for turning the defendant over to a slaveholder. Southerners felt that the Fugitive Slave Act was justified because they considered slaves to be property. But Northerners resented the Fugitive Slave Act. It required Northerners to help recapture runaway slaves. It placed fines on people who would not cooperate and jail terms on people who helped the fugitives escape. In addition, Southern slave catchers roamed the North, sometimes capturing free African Americans. The presence of slave catchers throughout the North brought home the issue of slavery to Northerners. They could no longer ignore the fact that, by supporting the Fugitive Slave Act, they played an important role in supporting slavery. They faced a moral choice. Should they obey the law and support slavery, or should they break the law and oppose slavery? State both views of the Fugitive Slave Act. Southerners viewed slaves as property and Congress passed a law to appease the South to help slaveholders recapture runaway slaves. Northerners who opposed slavery did not want any part in supporting the return of escaped slaves based on moral grounds. The Kansas–Nebraska Act While the Fugitive Slave Act and Uncle Tom’s Cabin heightened the conflicts between the North and the South, the issue of slavery in the territories brought bloodshed to the West. In 1854, Senator Stephen A. Douglas of Illinois drafted a bill to organize territorial governments for the Nebraska Territory. He proposed that it be divided into two territories—Nebraska and Kansas. To get Southern support for the bill, he suggested that the decision about whether to allow slavery in each of these territories be settled by popular sovereignty. Popular sovereignty is a system where the residents vote to decide an issue. If this bill passed, it would result in getting rid of the Missouri Compromise by allowing people to vote for slavery in territories where the Missouri Compromise had banned it.
As Douglas hoped, Southerners applauded the repeal of the Missouri Compromise and supported the bill. Even though the bill angered opponents of slavery, it passed. It became known as the Kansas–Nebraska Act. Few people realized that the act would soon turn Kansas into a battleground over slavery. How did the Kansas-Nebraska Act hasten the Civil War? The Act repealed the Missouri Compromise which had previously outlawed slavery above the 36° 30’ latitude line and in the Louisiana Territory. The Kansas-Nebraska act angered opponents of slavery but was supported by Southerners. This led to more sectionalism and tension between the North and the South. The Case of Dred Scott The split in the country was made worse by the Supreme Court decision in the case of Dred Scott. Scott had been a slave in Missouri. His owner took him to live in territories where slavery was illegal. Then they returned to Missouri. After his owner’s death, Scott sued for his freedom. He argued that he was a free man because he had lived in territories where slavery was illegal. His case, Dred Scott v. Sandford, reached the Supreme Court in 1856. In 1857, the Court ruled against Scott. Chief Justice Roger B. Taney [TAW•nee] delivered his opinion in the case. In it, he said that Dred Scott was not a U.S. citizen. As a result, he could not sue in US courts. Taney also ruled that Scott was bound by Missouri’s slave code because he lived in Missouri. As a result, Scott’s time in free territory did not matter in his case. In addition, Taney argued that Congress could not ban slavery in the territories. To do so would violate the slaveholders’ property rights, protected by the Fifth Amendment. In effect, Taney declared legislation such as the Missouri Compromise unconstitutional. Southerners cheered the Court’s decision. Many Northerners were outraged and looked to the Republican Party to halt the growing power of Southern slaveholders. In a few sentences, how did the Dred Scott case make the Civil War closer? The Dred Scott case empowered southern slaveholders. They believed the law was on their side and slaves were property, protected by the Fifth Amendment. Northerners were upset and did not want Southern slaveholders to gain more power. The Election of 1860 Despite Lincoln’s statements that he would do nothing to abolish slavery in the South, white Southerners did not trust him. Many were sure that he and the other Republicans would move to ban slavery. As a result, white Southerners saw the Republican victory as a threat to the Southern way of life.
What was the main issue in the election of 1860? The main issue in this election was the issue of slavery in the territories. Northern Democrats believed in "popular sovereignty," Southern Democrats endorsed a federal slave code, and the Republican party and Lincoln were morally opposed to slavery. At this point, do you think the war could have been avoided? Why/why not? The war could’ve been avoided if Lincoln would’ve agreed on a compromise on slavery, but he refused to compromise. Slavery was the biggest issue at that time. III: The Civil War Southern States Secede Before the 1860 presidential election, many Southerners had warned that if Lincoln won, the Southern states would secede, or withdraw from the Union. Supporters of secession based their arguments on the idea of states’ rights. They argued that the states had voluntarily joined the Union. Consequently, they claimed that the states also had the right to leave the Union. On December 20, 1860, South Carolina became the first state to secede. Other states in the Deep South, where slave labor and cotton production were most common, also considered secession. During the next six weeks, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, and Texas joined South Carolina in secession. Predict what the USA will do about the secession of the South. I predict that the United States would not let the South secede because it is part of the whole nation. The Union Responds to Secession Northerners considered the secession of the Southern states to be unconstitutional. During his last months in office, President James Buchanan argued against secession. He believed that the states did not have the right to withdraw from the Union because the federal government, not the state governments, was sovereign. If secession were permitted, the Union would become weak, like a “rope of sand.” He believed that the U.S. Constitution was framed to prevent such a thing from happening. In addition to these issues, secession raised the issue of majority rule. Southerners complained that Northerners intended to use their majority to force the South to abolish slavery. But Northerners responded that Southerners simply did not want to live by the rules of democracy. They complained that Southerners were not willing to live with the election results. As Northern writer James Russell Lowell wrote, “[The Southerners’] quarrel is not with the Republican Party, but with the theory of Democracy.”
After reading this, explain your understanding [perhaps a new understanding] of the issue of States’ Rights and how that issue contributed to the Civil War. In the 1820s and 1830s, the debate over which powers belonged to the states and which belonged to the Federal government became heated. There was mounting tension regarding the autonomy of the states to decide the issue of slavery. The south argued for states' rights and a weak federal government . Battles of the Civil War https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=2&psid=3061 What were the strengths? Northern Strengths Southern Strengths More manpower, large navy, developed railroad system, strong manufacturing base. Factories produced nine times more than what the Southerners produced. The Confederate army seemed stronger since many of their members had attended West Point or other military academies. Lethal War: https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=2&psid=3062 Name 3 reasons the Civil War was a very lethal war. 1. Over 600,000 people died in the conflict, more than WWI and WWII combined. 2. The introduction of improved weaponry made the Civil War a very lethal war. The new weapons had appeared so suddenly that commanders did not immediately realize that they needed to compensate for rifles' increased range and accuracy. 3. The Civil War also marked the first use by Americans of shrapnel, booby traps, and landmines. Bull Run: https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=2&psid=3063
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help