Concept Of Sectionalism

America’s transformation into the country we live in today has been formed through numerous events during its short history but the event that will split the United States into North versus South is truly one of the most defining events in American history. Through numerous events leading up to the start of the Civil War, I will attempt to show how the United States was destined for conflict and that the Civil War was inevitable. The first way I will show how the war could not be avoided will deal with the issue of slavery. Slavery should be the first mentioned because many conflicts within the United States leading up to the Civil War and the division of the United States dealt with slavery. The Missouri Compromise should also be talked

A major issue that caused major sectional discord was the constitutionality of slavery. In the constitution there was no mention of slavery of fears that it would divide the nation,

Sectionalism was one cause of the Civil Wars main causes. Sectionalism means loyalty to your state or union rather than your

Most importantly, with regards to sectionalism, were the many disputes involving slavery. As Anna Hayes from South Carolina asserts, in her letter to her cousin, the situation in South Carolina was just as bad “if not superior to the scenes acted in St. Domingo.” South Carolina was currently experiencing slave revolts at that time. These slave revolts brought up the question of whether or not slavery was correct which caused mush sectionalism between different regions of the United States. John Randolph, who also apposed the Tariff of 1816, mentioned that a simple geographical line – the Missouri Compromise- was not enough to completely silence the controversy of slavery.

The Antebellum period from 1800 to 1850 marked a time of sectionalism in American history. Furthermore, new territories gained during western expansion added to this conflict between different sections of America. Southern states wanted new slave territories, while the North wanted to contain the spread of slavery. While Western expansion contributed to growing sectional tensions between the North and South from 1800-1820, sectionalism intensified significantly from 1820-1850.

America’s states were being shattered in the fact that the states were turning against one another and fighting for what each geographical state believed in. The Northern more states wanted slavery to be abolished and to treat them like humans, however the South

David M. Potter theme of Impending Crisis is the study of sectional conflict dealing primarily with political events that led up to or caused southern states to secede from the Union resulting in the Civil War. Potter contends that during the expansionist period of the 1840s the country was experiencing a growth of American nationalism, but “the emergence of the sectionalism which almost destroyed the nation was symbolized by an amendment to an appropriation bill which was never enacted.” For the next fifteen years the Wilmot Proviso (1846) and the issue of slavery would become “a catalyst of all sectional antagonisms, political, economic, and cultural…opened the floodgates of sectionalism, for now all the pent-up moral indignation which had been walled in by the constitutional inhibition could be vented into the territorial question.”

During Monroe’s two terms, sectionalism, an excessive regard for sectional or local interest, increased greatly. This increase in sectionalism is due to acts like the Tariff of 1816. A tell tale sign that the Tariff of 1816 was going to cause sectionalism was that in the U.S. House of Representatives, the

The years following the War of 1812 became known as the “era of good feelings”. During this time you see the expansion of nationalism within the United States. It started mainly in the 1816 shortly before Monroe took office, and lasted until the end of his Presidency in the year of 1824. Before the “era of good feelings” there were certain events taking place that will lead up to this era. The first of these is the acquired land of the Louisiana Purchase from the French. Through this the United States was able to double its land. The gained independence from this purchase was able to keep other countries father away from the US’s boundaries and was able to separate the

For example, there was a high tariff placed on foreign goods. This was beneficial for the north because it increased the chances of Americans purchasing the goods produced in their factories. However, this was disadvantageous for the south. Since slaves were viewed as objects, imported slaves were considered imported goods and were sold with high tariffs attached to them. The three regions were becoming more sectionalist because they were becoming increasing concerned with problems facing their own area, and not the country as a whole. The sectionalism that emerged during this time period did so within a short period of time. This is easy to see in the election maps of 1820 and 1824. Within these four years, the United States went from being uniformly supportive of one candidate (Monroe in 1820), to having support for several candidates. While much of the south was in support of Andrew Jackson, the first president who did not have a formal education and supported the “common man”, much of the north backed John Q. Adams, the eventual winner. These maps illustrate the regional differences that eventually led to the lack of a majority vote. Sectionalism became quite prominent with the emergence of different factions within the Republican Party and eventually the creation of new parties. Each region was sectionalist in that they voted for the candidate who would be the best advocate for their area, rather than leader for their country.

In the mid-1800's, many events occurred that increased sectional tension between the Northern and Southern states of the Union. These tensions ultimately resulted in the outbreak of civil war. One thing in particular that is considered to be a source of sectional discord is the U.S. Constitution. However the Constitution itself was not a source of sectional tension that caused the failure of the Union. The failure erupted generally from the issue of slavery. combination of the people in general and the differences in economic styles that lead to the downfall. Poor political decisions such as the Kansas Nebraska Act, lead to bad decisions which worsened the tensions of the union. The economic differences ultimately lead to the Civil War

The South’s Secession from the Union was caused by society pressing the differences rather than synthesizing on our similarities, the fear of emancipation, and Abraham Lincoln succeeding in his candidacy for the 1860 presidential election. All of these factors pushed southerners to conclude leaving the Union would be more beneficial rather than staying. Society focusing on the differences between themselves rather than exploring our similarities is one of the main reasons why the south wanted to secede. Document 1 represents this in a letter from Thomas Jefferson to John Holmes in response to the Missouri compromise which he says “Weight the blessings they will throw away, against an abstract principle more likely to be effected by union than

The United States was a very divided country between the North and the South in the 19th century. “Reconstruction was a vicious and destructive experience, a period where when vindictive Northerners inflicted humiliation and revenge on the divided south” (Brinkley 351). During the time of reconstruction, President Lincoln and Andrew Johnson had large plans for the country but shortly took a sharp turn of the unexpected, radicals put in the Black Codes and amendments into the law, and the south had “redeemed” itself and began to rebuild.

In the early years of the 19th century, slavery was more than ever turning into a sectional concern, such that the nation had essentially become divided along regional lines. Based on economic or moral reasoning, people of the Northern states were increasingly in support of opposition to slavery, all the while Southerners became united to defend the institution of slavery. Brought on by profound changes including regional differences in the pattern of slavery in the upper and lower South, as well as the movement of abolitionism in the North, slavery in America had transformed from an issue of politics into a moral campaign during the period of 1815-1860, ultimately polarizing the North and the South to the point in which threats of a Southern disunion would mark the beginning of the Civil War in 1861 (Goldfield et. al, The American Journey, p. 281).

In efforts to better understand the Civil War most historians examine the Sectional Crisis and the Compromise of 1850 in the decades leading up to the worst years in American History. Some historians prefer to focus on the underlying theme of the war, others tightly examine individual leaders, events, and political parties, connecting them all together like puzzle pieces to define the years prior to the war. Despite the contrasting views, it is clear to realize the constant prevailing issues of the Antebellum Period, the Sectional Crisis and the Compromise of 1850. In particular, the Compromise of 1850 is deceivingly taught as only establishing 3 pivotal elements: the status of slavery in future territories (popular sovereignty), California statehood, and the fugitive slave law. Granted these elements of the compromise provide a great amount of controversy long after their birth, but one element of the compromise perceives to fail in obtaining recognition. The Texas-New Mexico boundary resolution seems to find itself fading away from its relevancy to the civil war, shadowed by more prominent issues regarding the stability of the Union. Abandoning the traditional teaching of the compromise, the Texas-New Mexico border decision figuratively and literally changed the identity of Texas. This was the long awaited result caused by deep rooted social and political issues dating back to the Texas Revolution.