The Role Of Antislavery In Uncle Tom's Cabin

As stated above, the rapid spread of abolitionists in the northern states and the pro-slavery activism in the southern states, the United States of America was soon torn apart. In the year of 1820, an act known as the Missouri Compromise was passed, and slavery was banned from all newly created western territories. This passing caused a lot of tension in the southern states because they believed it was going to eventually diminish their industrial success. A few decades later in 1857, the United States Supreme Court made a new legal principle known as the Dred Scott Decision, which stated that African slaves (in the slave

During the 19th century, slavery expanded geographically and demographically in the South and Southwest of America, generating a wave of abolitionist movements. These events provoked a different response in the country’s society, since not everyone shared the same definition of slavery and freedom. These concepts started to get involved in almost every part of American sociopolitical life, creating differing points of view that would later conform the two sides in the Civil War of America: The Union in the north, and Confederacy in the south.

The novel Uncle Tom's Cabin was written by Harriet Beecher Stowe and published in the United States in 1852. The novel depicted slavery as a moral evil and was the cause of much controversy at the time and long after. Uncle Tom's Cabin outraged the South and received praise in the North. The publication of Uncle Tom's Cabin was a major turning point for the United States which helped bring about the Civil War.

Abolitionists and Northerners challenge the spread of slavery by organizing a series of debates, the Lincoln-Douglas debate, also, by some raids, which later led to a Civil War and by taking some critical decisions, which led to a division in the country. The Dred Scott decision caused controversy all over the country. According to the text, it says, “Republicans and other antislavery groups were outraged, calling the Dred Scott decision “the greatest crime” ever committed in the nation’s courts” (Pg. 550). In fact, the Dred Scott Decision led to a greater division in the country; therefore, the decision of the Supreme Court, which ruled in the case of Dred Scott that the spread of slavery couldn’t be restricted. In effect, the decision meant

They believed that the framers of the Constitution did not consider black people equal to white and had no jurisdiction to Dred Scott's case. Moreover stating from Article III of the Constitution, which wrote that federal courts only hear from citizens of the United States and slaves were unpermitted to speak up in courts. Favoring the Missouri Supreme Court and the federal circuit court, the Supreme Court alleged the Missouri Compromise unconstitutional. Many dissenting arguments to this case included Justice McLean, who pointed out that five out of all thirteen states allowed black males to vote, which was only a right for citizens, therefore indirectly blacks in those states should be considered as free men.

Firstly, the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 established popular sovereignty which allowed the states to choose whether they were free or slave-holding (Doc 3). This led to a period of time known as Bleeding Kansas when tensions between antislavery Republicans and pro-slavery Democrats increased as border ruffians tipped the votes and violence ensued. Also, the Caning of Charles Sumner, when Northern Congressman Sumner was beat by Southern Congressman Preston Brooks, further intensified tensions (Doc 4). The event led Northerners to view Southerners as uncivilized and violent, further increasing the gap between the North and the South. Thirdly, the Dred Scott v. Sandford decision ruled that slaves were not citizens and it allowed slavery virtually everywhere (Doc 5). This angered Northerners extremely because slavery was banned in the North and most Northerners supported antislavery. It also effectively repealed the Kansas-Nebraska Act that allowed states to choose being slave-holding or free, further angering the North. Altogether these events were the reason sectionalism became such a large issue; they significantly increased mutual dislike between the North and the South and fragmented the

This decision did not go to Dred Scott's favor. The Supreme Court had decided that Dred Scott was not a person, but rather property so that meant wherever Dred went he was still going to be considered a slave. This caused a repeal in the Missouri Compromise and angered most northerners because this meant slavery could be spread to

　　　　The Dred Scott decision was significant because it was the first time since Marbury v. Madison that the Supreme Court said an act of congress was unconstitutional. It said the congress had no power to ban slavery in the federal territories; therefore, the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional. By doing this, the Court also said people in the territories had no right to decide whether their state should be a free or a slave state. This was known as popular sovereignty. The decision also hurt the new Republican Party which was trying to stop the spread of slavery. Further, this decision continued the conflict over slavery between the north and south and

Although the Dred Scott case broke the Missouri Compromise which placed restrictions on slavery in some U.S. territories. This case became a rallying point for the abolitionists leading to the election of Abraham Lincoln. The Dred Scott case eventually got people to stop protesting slavery, but the Court had broken the Missouri Compromise and people in the North were outraged. The Dred Scott decision is important because although it was intended to settle the question of slavery, it adopted a strong view and let

In the 1830’s to 60’s, tension was building up in the United States. The country was fighting with itself over the controversial topic of slavery- until it exploded into a civil war. During these times, states were split into south and north. Southern states allowed slavery, while Northern states were free states- The Abolitionist movement first sought to abolish slavery, and get rid of racial discrimination immediately. However, this did not work- in 1862, the Civil War started, which split the entire country in two over the issue. Abolitionists, people who opposed slavery, were continuing to work to try to continue their plan to end slavery. Some, like William Lloyd Garrison, wrote newspapers, like the Liberator. Well known speakers like Frederick Douglass and Lucy Stone supported the movement, as did many. Abolitionists were also known to protect fugitive slaves after the Fugitive Slave Act, passed in 1850, which meant slaves within the Northern states could be prosecuted and brought back to the Southern states,

Although historians disagree on its political impact, abolitionism unquestionably helped define slavery as a pressing moral problem (Sellman). Abolitionists played a key role in setting the terms of the debate over slavery and in making it a convincing moral issue, still they had remarkably little influence in the North. Very few Northerners were abolitionists, and many regarded abolitionists as dangerous radicals. What made their case telling was the South's violent reaction. Extreme Southern responses appeared to confirm abolitionist warnings about a conspiratorial "Slave Power." (Larkin) By the 1850s, however, the escalating sectional conflict had largely taken on a force of its own, one that owed less and less to

During the eighteenth century, the opposition to slavery prior to forming the United States became increasingly stronger between the Northern and Southern territories. Prior to the 1830s, antislavery societies began to emerge from every corner to challenge the slave system and to help combat slavery. During this time, people had different ideas about how to confront the issue of slavery in the system and how to establish a freedom of oppression. In the eighteenth century, antislavery political activists believed the slave system would able to be changed through peaceful political reforms, while others felt that real change could only be achieved by violence. A radical white abolitionist named John Brown became a historical figure whose beliefs motivated the violent abolitionist crusade.

Throughout American history, literature has been used to bring social injustices into public view. One successful example of this was anti-slavery work written before and during the Abolitionist Movement. Abolitionist literature began to appear predominantly in 1820. Until the Civil War, the anti-slavery press produced a steadily growing stream of newspaper articles, periodicals, sermons, children's publications, speeches, abolitionist society reports, broadsides, poems, and memoirs of former slaves. These works, initially a grass roots effort, led to increased support for the end of slavery. Through the use of vivid imagery and life experiences these authors were able to show their readers the crimes against humanity caused by slavery.

The anti-slavery novel, Uncle Tom’s Cabin, by Harriet Beecher Stowe was written at a time when slavery was a largely common practice among Americans. It not only helped lay the foundation for the Civil War but also contained many themes that publicized the evil of slavery to all people. The book contains themes such as the moral power of women, human right, and many more. The most important theme Stowe attempts to portray to readers is the incompatibility of slavery and Christianity. She makes it very clear that she does not believe slavery and Christianity can coexist and that slavery is against all Christian morals. She believes no Christian should allow the existence or practice of slavery.

The Court also ruled that Congress lacked power to ban slavery in the U.S. territories. And lastly, the Court declared that the rights of slave-owners were constitutionally protected by the Fifth Amendment because slaves were bought by owners, labeling them as property. In the North, antislavery supporters were outraged by the outcome of the Dred Scott case, strengthening the newly submitted Republican Party and helping ignite the violence between slave-owners and abolitionists on the frontier. The Missouri Compromise was declared unconstitutional under the laws made in the Dred Scott v. Stanford Supreme Court Case in 1857. The case gave Northerners a reason to fear Southern slave power. It left the nation indecisive on the actions it should take to replenish the nation of what it needs to settle the sectional tensions in which were causing our country to fall apart.