Civil War Legality

On the other hand, Lincoln thought that while there has been no slavery desirable, he felt should not think that extends to several other new districts, and this should avoid legally. And this should be avoided in a legal manner, with tenacity he had found the solution for this, however, was the right to property enshrined in the U.S. Constitution Even so, the war powers of the President Lincoln, he made a call to get an emancipation during the civil war, in order to enable it to seize the properties of hard workers in order to free them from the legal means

The Civil War was fought over the “race problem,” to determine the place of African-Americans in America. The Union won the war and freed the slaves. However, when President Lincoln declared the Emancipation Proclamation, a hopeful promise for freedom from oppression and slavery for African-Americans, he refrained from announcing the decades of hardship that would follow to obtaining the new won “freedom”. Over the course of nearly a century, African-Americans would be deprived and face adversity to their rights. They faced something perhaps worse than slavery; plagued with the threat of being lynched or beat for walking at the wrong place at the wrong time. Despite the addition of the 14th and

The South, on the other hand, was highly dependent upon the institution of slavery. It was still primarily an agricultural society that needed as many laborers as possible in order for the plantation owners to make ends meet. According to historian Douglas Harper, “In 1793 came the cotton gin, which brought a 50-fold increase in the average daily output of short-staple cotton, promoted the rapid expansion of a ‘cotton kingdom’ across the Deep South, and made large-scale slavery profitable.” Because of this, the slave became an essential tool to the farmers of the south; more money became invested in slavery rather than in industrial improvements. Based upon the 1860 U.S. Census, there were almost a whopping total of four million slaves in the South alone. In fact, the more slaves an owner had, the more prestige. “Most slave owners owned fewer than five slaves, and only 12 percent of Southerners had twenty or more slaves. Many whites who had no slaves looked with envy upon the wealthy, and to a degree admired them.” This hierarchy had a clearly defined social structure which created distinctions between rich and poor whites as well as racial segregation. This agricultural society and its strict hierarchy only increased the social and racial disparities found in the southern region of the United States.

Every effort the North made to pacify the South and/or to help the Blacks was blatantly rejected by the South. If the North declared one law, the South would find a loophole and thus the country was a mess of disunity and debate over Constitutional changes (?) (Doc. A and B). This tug-of-war is also anther reason for why no social changes resulted from constitutional changes from 1860 to 1877. Even if the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments were wholeheartedly radical and revolutionary constitutional changes, social changes, never mind developments, were not in any way possible because of strong Southern resistance (Doc. G).

The civil war, reconstruction, and Redemption era does serve as a unique moment in American history because it shaped what kind of nation US would become. All wars are the result of social change, talks of revolution, institution of slavery and connection to power and liberation. There are many reasons that attribute to the institution of slavery becoming a big determinant in the Civil War and in American History. A consistent reason is that the states have always been dependent upon themselves and relying on their own kind to create a sense of power. The institution of slavery gave white men a sense of power in which was stripped away from them by the government. They no longer could control and have an opinion in state nor federal government decisions. Throughout all these eras of history the enslaves Africans were never seen as equal, therefore were never treated as equal. They were always seen as the black labor workers. The focus point of this paper will be the institution of slavery. After the civil war and reconstruction, America changed drastically in defining slavery and what would become of the institution.

Slavery was the focal point of the economy in the South, this inthrallment was the fuel for the agricultural South as well as the industrial North. Slaves would work the lands of their masters and bring in the raw materials produced, and these raw materials, commonly tobacco and cotton, would be shipped to the North and Europe. The North used the raw materials for the textile mills from the South because it made more economic sense because it cost less than the raw materials coming from Europe. Both regions became dependent upon each other, "the ruin of thousands and hundreds of thousands in the manufacturing states..." (Doc A) would occur if slavery was prevented from spreading by the Republicans. This claim being that if the North continued its free-soil mentality, it would fail as well due to a lack of raw materials caused by an insufficient amount of land for slaves and plantations; "a blow at slavery ia a blow at commerce and civilization..." (Doc R). The North was strongly tied economically to the products of slavery, the South was immensely impacted by slavery, it was the foundation and

In the article “The Central Theme of Southern Slavery” Ulrich B. Phillips asserts that among several other motives that served as a drive for white Southerners to support slavery, the predominant one was their desire to preserve white supremacy in the South. He claims that all of the states in the US are similar except for the opinion about slavery. Phillips emphasizes that the idea of slavery in the South was important and perceived by southerners as heritage and a tradition. He also claims that the institution wasn’t merely economic, but also a system of social order. In addition, the white southerners saw abolition as a major threat to their economic freedom. According to Phillips, some Southerners saw deportation of african-american citizens as another solution to the slavery crisis in the United States. However,

The Civil War that occurred was one of the darkest times in our history as a country. It was a time where there was a complete breakdown of social and political systems. Hundreds of thousands were killed and hundreds of thousands more were aversely affected. However, it was also a time of remembrance and significant moral progress. It is remembered as the turning point in American History and would be the foundation for the Civil Rights movement many years later.

One main and obvious reason for the adamant views of anti-slavery and slavery and the ultimate unsuccess of the Missouri Compromise was the diverse circumstances between the Northern and Southern economic systems due to geography and other factors. There was a much larger number of free blacks in the North, showing the varying degree between their economic system compared to the South.(A) The economic well-being of the South, who 's revenue came mainly from farming, was based on the free labor of slaves. John C. Calhoun asserted that the "South will not, cannot, surrender our institutions.....that there never has yet existed a wealthy and civilized society in which one portion of a community did not......live on the labor of the other." The abolition of slavery was viewed by the South as economic suicide. Northerners, who mainly manufactured goods and used the labor of poorly paid immigrants, viewed slavery as morally wrong as well as unnecessary. With the help of free blacks in the North who expressed their experiences as slaves and promoted liberation through propaganda, such views of

One of the last call that the opponents made before the civil war was the principle of popular sovereignty in which the people state that government exist to serve them and help them to move as a nation, over the U.S. history this sovereignty led to riots and fight between people from the same states which wanted to abolish slavery against the ones that wanted to keep

The Union, backed by President Abraham Lincoln, was trying to abolish slavery. The South found this to be oppressive and used their right to "throw off such Government" and, one by one,

In the South, roughly every 4 out of 10 people were slaves there, and the value of the slaves continued to rise as the war went on. The amount of farmland, cotton plantations, etc. were on the rise and they needed the workforce to sustain those lands. After the end of the war and occurrence of the emancipation, the white slaveholders ultimately sold of parts of their large farmlands to freedmen through the sharecropping concept, retaining their lands, but under a different contract. The emancipation allowed the slaves to obtain lands from their previous white owners, thus forcing the South’s revenue streams to be rebuilt from the ground up. Even though the revenue that the white land/slave owners was severely diminished, through sharecropping and reunification with the union, they were able to slowly recover what was lost as time went

The stability that slavery created in the American South between 1820 and 1860 was phenomenal. Economic stability was like no other country had ever seen, this economic stability created a global marketing network throughout many different nations, trade routes that still exist within modern America today. Slavery became the bedrock of American South livelihood; it became so valuable that it was almost seen as unimaginable to live without slavery. “It was inconceivable that European colonists could have settled and developed America without slave labour taking place,” this was according to……. The reason the south prospered and grew like it did was due to slavery. The value that slaves had to their slave owners was unquestionable. Slave owners were able to receive loans, whilst using their slaves as guarantors; these loans would then have been used in the purchasing of further land, more livestock and more slaves. It was also said that slave owners used their slaves to pay of any outstanding debt they may have had. It is clear to see the economic value that slaves possessed; they were included in the valuation of estates, for example; (Example), and this in turn became a source of tax revenue for the National as well as the local Governments, it was also

Federalization of crime has expanded dramatically in the 200 plus years since the drafting of the U. S. Constitution. The original scope of the federal criminal jurisdiction was very narrow, and crime control was left largely to the states. Until the Civil War, there were only a small number of federal offenses, and they dealt with injury to or interference with the federal government itself or its programs. The federal offenses during this time were treason, counterfeiting, piracy, and felonies committed on the high seas (Marion & Oliver, 2012). Except in those areas where federal jurisdiction was exclusive, the District of Columbia and the federal territories, federal law did not reach crimes against individuals; such as murder, rape, arson, robbery and fraud, were absolute concern of the states. State laws defined these offenses which were prosecuted by state or local officials. Congressional activity making essential local conduct a federal crime has accelerated greatly, notably in areas in which existing state laws already criminalize the same conduct. One must examine the history of federalization of crime to clearly understand why the U.S. Government began to federalize crime and the arguments for and against the federalization of crime.

The conclusion of the Civil War in favor of the north was supposed to mean an end to slavery and equal rights for the former slaves. Although laws and amendments were passed to uphold this assumption, the United States Government fell short. The thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth amendments were proposed and passed within five years of the Civil War’s conclusion. These amendments were to create equality throughout the United States, especially in the south where slavery had been most abundant. Making equality a realization would not be an easy task. This is because many problems were not perceived before and during the war. The reunification of the country would prove to be harder than expected, and entry into a new lifestyle would be