Research Paper On The Secession

The secession of South Carolina on December 20, 1860, by a vote of 169-0 was a response to the election of Abraham Lincoln of 1860. Lincoln perceived as an abolitionist wanted to contain slavery rather than ending it. The majority party above the Mason-Dixon line were Republicans and below were primarily Democrats and Republicans were viewed as abolitionists. The election of a Republican threatened the South’s status quo. The primary catalyst for secession was based on slavery. Different social cultures and political beliefs developed due to the South’s intimate and reliant relationship on slavery. Southern whites feared the end of slavery and this paranoia was shared among plantation slave owners and white Yeoman farmers. Southern whites felt that the North were threatening the supposed tranquility of the South. The South’s agrarian economy, honor, and independence were believed to be in danger. Slavery was intertwined with the South’s social, cultural, and economic makeup. As a result of slavery, the South developed a paternalistic culture and racial ideology of white supremacy. The perceived notion that the North was influencing it’s political and social beliefs on the South lead them to believe that secession was the only act of self-preservation. The growing differences between the South and North made it difficult to negotiate. This fear was exaggerated and accelerated the South’s eventual implosion. The South believed that without slavery it would self-destruct and

Tensions between the North and South had grown steadily since the anti slavery movement in 1830. Several compromises between the North and South regarding slavery had been passed such as the Nebraska-Kansas and the Missouri act; but this did little to relieve the strain. The election of President Lincoln in 1861 proved to be the boiling point for the South, and secession followed. This eventually sparked the civil war; which was viewed differently by the North and the South. The Northern goal was to keep the Union intact while the Southern goal was to separate from the Union. Southern leaders gave convincing arguments to justify secession. Exploring documents from South Carolina’s secession ordinance and a speech from the Georgia

So Northerners never realized the importance of slaves to the South and were inconsiderate towards the Southern farmers. This caused unfair compromises to be created and caused fights and feeling of enmity towards each other. Also, Harriet Beecher Stowe’s book, Uncle Tom’s Cabin, caused Northerners to have a false understanding that Southerners were extremely cruel to their slaves.

Southern states left the Union because they thought they had more power than the Federal Government. “Many Southerners favored secession as part of the idea that the states have rights and powers, which the federal government cannot legally deny”(Doc 5). This means that Southerners thought that the Federal Government could not deny their right to have slavery so they left. Southern states left the Union because Abraham Lincoln banned slavery and it was their only way to make a

The line between the North and South was deeply imbedded due to both moral and economic factors. Events in our country's history meant that this rift was eventually going to happen and war would ensue. The South always thought they were oppressed and looked down upon. They decided enough was enough when Lincoln became president and fought back. But, the economics of the two factions were far too vast to ever make a permanent compromise. Just like Lincoln said “A house divided against itself cannot stand. I believe this government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved—I do not expect the house to fall—but I do expect it will cease to be divided.” which is what led to the war. The country divided because of the North success in the Industrial Revolution and the South’s refusal to join this revolution and relieve itself of its dependency on the economic

Throughout history, people have gone to extreme lengths to secure their economic well being. The people in the Southern states were no different in this regard, and for this reason we affirm the resolution that the South was justified to secede from the Union. Before going any farther, we must define key terms in the resolution. The South refers to the 11 states who became the Confederate States of America. The Union was the United States in 1860. Lastly, justified means done for a legitimate reason, in this case in the context of the political and economic circumstances of the time. We support our affirmation with the following contention: that the South’s economic interests were in such danger that they took the only path available to them

When the American Civil War began in the spring of 1861, those flocking to enlistment stations in states both north and south chiefly defined their cause as one of preservation. From Maine to Minnesota, young men joined up to preserve the Union. From Virginia to Texas, their future foes on the battlefield enlisted to preserve a social order, a social order at its core built on the institution of slavery and racial superiority . Secession had not been framed by prominent Southerners like Robert Toombs as a defensive measure to retain the fruits of the revolution against King George, a fight against those who sought to “intrique insurrection with all its nameless horrors.” (Toombs Speech) On January 1, 1863, when Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation went into effect the war became a revolution. The Union, the soldiers in blue fought to preserve could no longer exist. On every mile of soil, they would return to the Stars and Stripes from that moment on, the fabric of society would be irrevocably changed. In May of 1865, with the abolition of slavery engrained into the Constitution with the passage of the 13th Amendment, the Confederate armies of Lee and Johnston disbanded, and Lincoln dead of an assassin’s bullet; this change was the only certainty the torn fabric of the newly reunited states was left to be resown. Andrew Johnson and Southern Democrats believed the revolution of 1863 had gone far enough. Radical Republicans and African-Americans sought instead to bring it to

When President Lincoln first called for troops to put down the confederate rebellion, he made no connection between this action and an attempt to end slavery. In fact, he explicitly stated "the utmost care will be observed to avoid any devastation, any destruction of, or interference with, property..." At this point, slavery was not yet integral to the struggle, it was much more important for the Union to air on the side of political prudence and avoid angering loyal boarder states. However, despite this lack of political dialogue, many abolitionists, slaves, and free blacks felt the war to preserve the union could also be a war to end slavery. In the end, they were right, as military need overwhelmed potential political dangers, slaves

First off, the way they declared secession and proceeded to do so was illegal. To begin with everyday we recite the pledge of allegiance where it states, “one nation, indivisible”. Those southerners recited the same pledge we did and they recited themselves that this union is indivisible. Next, under the constitution of the United States of America secession was and always will be considered illegal because of Article 10 Section 1. In this part of the constitution it was illustrated that, “No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation….”. The southern states obviously did not follow that and violated the constitution they agreed to abide by themselves. When they concurred to join the Union they agreed to join an indivisible nation. Nowhere could they make a complaint worthy enough to try to separate for the states that they agreed to join, but of course they tried to with the controversial subject of slavery.

During the mid 1800’s many Americans began to have mix feelings over the issue of slavery. Many northern Americans believed that slavery was morally wrong and that it was an evil. Southerners on the other hand believed it was a good for the economy as well as for commerce. This great split of attitudes between the north and the south eventually led to threat of the civil war.

This shows that South Carolina had the right to secede because it was a sovereign state. It also shows how the South should have had the right to decide whether they would want to secede from the country or not. Another example is that when the Southern states joined the Union, it was voluntarily (Appleby et.al 556). “Nowhere in the Constitution is there any mention of the union of the states being permanent.” (http:/civilwar.bluegrass.net). This shows that they should have the right to leave the Union if they choose to. They had this right because the South had no bind with the Union stating that they had to stay except for the United States constitution in which the North had already violated. Even though the United States constitution was what they looked at as a contract, the Union already desecrated its’ terms before this dispute. It also shows how the right was their own and the government could not control their choices in staying or not. These reasons and examples show how the South had to right to secede because of various reasons regarding the political state the government was in.

On the other side was the Union, also known as the Yankees; a group determined to put out the rebels of the South, and preserve the nation that was created in 1776. Like the Confederates, the Union also found support in the memory of the Revolutionary War. Union soldiers fought the “Traitors who sought to tear down and break into fragments the glorious temple that our forefathers reared with blood and tears” (Mc.Pherson 28). If the south was to secede it would have destroyed and undermined the power and authority of the Constitution, and therefore break the union that made up the United States of America. The Union soldiers referred to the Confederates as the “Rebels”, who did not deserve to be part of the united nation for their selfish and inhumane habits, yet their land belonged to the country as a whole. A soldier in the Sherman army wrote to his wife “We want to kill them all off and cleanse the country… their punishment is light when compared with what justice is demanded” (Mc.Pherson 40-41). Union militias could not bear the thought of secession, for they “will be held responsible before God if we don’t

“A house divided against itself cannot stand.”1 These words, spoken by Abraham Lincoln, foreshadowed the war that became the bloodiest in all of the United State's history. The Civil War was a brutal conflict between the North and South; brother against brother. With slavery as the root cause, Southern states had seceded from the Union and were fighting for their independence. They became the Confederate States of America (CSA) and were a force to be reckoned with. The Union, however, put up a fierce struggle to preserve the country. If the Civil War was to be a war of attrition, the North had the upper hand because of its large population, industrialization, raw materials, railroad mileage, and navy. But if the war was short lived, the

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).

One of the most, if not the most, controversial and heated debates following the United States independence was regarding the institution of slavery. In the introduction to his book Half Slave and Half Free, Bruce Levine quotes Carl Schurzs’ observation as the “slave question not being a mere occasional quarrel between two sections of the country divided by a geographic line, but a great struggle between two antagonistic systems of social organization (p.15)”. The Nouthern states that allowed slavery benefited from the agricultural labor that those slaves provided. The Northern states that prohibited slavery did so for moral and pragmatic reasons; they felt it was morally wrong to deny another human any form of rights, and did not like the economic advantage it gave to the Southern states. With the use of slavery largely concentrated in the South, the movement against it came from the North and was led by abolitionists; those who were committed to bringing an end to the practice. In this course we have defined “Practice” as the conduct of policy, such as opinion, election, parties and law-making (Lecture). We define Policy as the goals of politics, those being sovereignty, defense, and a collective well-being (Lecture). The following analytical essay will examine antislavery sentiment and practices in the Northern states and the reaction of Southern states. Additionally how the pressures from both sides influenced the Policy of the United States following independence then