Politicians, Slavery Extension, And The Coming Of The Civil War By Michael Holt

Improved Essays
The Fate of Their Country: Politicians, Slavery Extension, and the Coming of the Civil War. By Michael Holt

Since the founding of the United States, the founding fathers aimed to allow the people a voice. However, in the 19th century, despite such core principles, the government began to exercise its power in a multitude of ways. With the introduction of opposing ideas and thoughts, differing political parties emerged. The core division between the parties remained one thing: slavery. In his book, Holt argues that the American people did not initiate the American Civil War; rather, politicians, with agendas, stoked the division of the nation long before the emergence of the American Civil War. Presenting his argument in four sections, Holt lays the foundation for his argument by examining specific legislative proposals—Wilmot Proviso, the Comprise of 1850, and the Kanas-Nebraska Act—, which contributed to the inception of the American Civil War. In the first chapter, Holt corrects a misunderstanding regarding the thrust of the Civil War. Parties against slavery did not seek its eradication; rather, they sought to keep slavery from entering free states. In the years leading up to the civil war, Northern and Southern politicians fought over the slavery expansion issue. For instance, Missouri proved a point of contention. If Northerners could not persuade Missouri to become a free state, Southerners gained considerable power. Additionally, Northern and Southern politicians fought over the presidents’ appeal for adding Texas, a pre-existing slave state into the union. Thus, the crux of the northern and southern conflict lay in the extension of slavery, not in its dismal. Additionally, Holt, in chapter two, explores the genesis of the Wilmot Proviso and its implications on slavery extension. President Polk desired to obtain funds from congress in order to pay for Mexican territories. Southern Democrats immediately saw the influence of obtaining Mexican slave holding states meant for slavery extension. Worried about slavery extension, Northern Democrat, David Wilmot, proposed a controversial idea: territory received from Mexico could not continuing practicing slavery, unless as an act of punishment for one’s crimes. For years, the Wilmot Proviso garnered similar responses when proposed to congress. Northerners ardently supported the non-extension of the slavery, whereas Southern politicians opposed it. Due to the overwhelming number of southern politicians within Congress, Congress never passed Wilmot’s Proviso. In
…show more content…
Anathema to pro-slavery politicians, the Missouri Comprise enacted in 1820 introduced Maine as a free state and Missouri as a slave state. Such a comprise aided in allowing the opposing southern and northern politicians from having to much power. However, all southern politicians soon hated the Missouri Comprise. When passing the Missouri Comprise, congress also prohibited territory within the Louisiana Purchase slavery. Thus, Nebraska could not practice slavery. In an effort to save his political party, however, Stephen A. Douglas, put forth a bill directly repealing the Missouri Comprise by granting popular sovereignty. The Kansas-Nebraska act infuriated northern senators. However, congress passed the Kansa-Nebraska Act, dividing the land into two sections: Nebraska, a free state, and Kansas, a slave state. Such created serious divides within the American political parties, even decimating the Whig party. Thus, by enacting the Kansa-Nebraska Act, politicians further added tension to the growing separation between northern and southern

Related Documents

  • Great Essays

    Bleeding America The Kansas-Nebraska Act, a act proposed by "Senator Stephen Douglas, a Democratic Senator from Illinois who introduced the Kansas-Nebraska Act"1 in hopes for the nation to build a transcontinental-railroad, hopefully having the eastern terminus in Chicago, but the railroad needed to be secure as it was going to go through the Kansas and Nebraska territories, preferably as states. Being a personal advocate of popular sovereignty, Stephen A. Douglas disliked the Missouri Compromise of 1820 and believed that the state should decide if it wants to be a free-state or a slave-state. Although the North and South were clearly different culturally and economically, separated by their own definition of the American Dream, the passing…

    • 1601 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The American Civil War was very misunderstood in that no one really knows the exact reason of why the war started. In Apostles of Disunion, Dew discusses topics such as slavery, racism, economics and state rights to push his point of view on the audience of why the war and secession began. Charles B. Dew wrote this book to inform the audience the secession came from not just the factor of state rights during the time between 1860 and 1861. Because Dew was a Southerner himself, he writes the book off of self-knowledge, experience others, and facts including people and their perspectives on the cause. The most common claim when it came to The Civil War’s cause is it beginning due to slavery and racism in the south; however Dew argues that the…

    • 1037 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Representative James Tallmadge even tried to propose an amendment which would essentially end slavery, during the time the Missouri request but the effort was defeated. The debate whether Missouri should be a slave or free state occurred for over a year. Northerners argued that Congress than had the power to prohibit slavery while the Southerners said they should have the freedom to choose whether the state should be slave or not. Though after a lot of debate they were soon able to come up with a compromise. The first part of the compromise was Missouri was admitted as a slave state while Maine was a free state.…

    • 566 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Passed by Congress in may of 1854, the Kansas Nebraska Act may be the most significant of the Pre-Civil War compromises. It admitted the Kansas and Nebraska as states, but rather than decide whether the territories would become slave or non-slave states based on their location in relation to the 36’ 30° line, they were allowed to choose for themselves. Kansas and Nebraska were not the only ones allowed to decide though, each territory was allowed to choose for itself if it would be a slave or non-slave state. This allowing of territories to choose slave or non-slave is called popular sovereignty. In popular sovereignty the people of the territory vote to decide if they will become a slave state or a non-slave state.…

    • 575 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Apush Dbq Tension

    • 527 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The thought of Lincoln taking their slaves, despite his promise not to, led them to secession. In the years preceding the Civil War both sides were forced to concede points to avoid violence, but in the end, it only delayed the inevitable fighting and made those for and against slavery frustrated and ready to bear arms. As the country’s stakes on land increased in size so too did the stakes of the issue at hand. Gradually, as the year, 1860 approached Americans faced a matter that could not be left alone.…

    • 527 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    1820 To 1860 Dbq Essay

    • 1710 Words
    • 7 Pages

    The period in American history from 1820 to 1860 lead to a divided nation on the brink of a civil war. One thing dividing the nation of America between 1820 and 1860 was the rise of many different political parties and the issue of states’ rights. Each politician was working for he advancement of the same country, yet had wildly different beliefs. For example, Senator John C. Calhoun of SOuth Carolina said, “We of the South will not, cannot, surrender our institutions,” when talking about slavery (Document A). While he was preaching the continuation with slavery, Democratic Congressman David Wilmot from Pennsylvania said, “The issue now presented is not whether slavery shall exist unmolested where it now is, but whether it shall be carried to new and distant regions, now free, where the footprint of a slave cannot be found” (Documented B).…

    • 1710 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Chap 13 What ideas did the term Manifest Destiny reflect? Did it cause historical events, such as the new political support for territorial expansion, or was it merely a description of events? For the next two decades, the professional politicians who managed the Second Party System avoided policies, such as the annexation of the slave holding Republic of Texas, that would prompt regional strife.…

    • 602 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Throughout the early and mid-1800s, sectional tensions arose throughout America. Sectionalism, or the loyalty to a particular subsegment of the Nation, rather than loyalty to the United States as a whole, was a pervasive characteristic of this period. Many factors contributed to these sectional tensions, however, the most divisive factor among the parties was the controversy over slavery. Slavery during this time was largely well-accepted in the South, but typically denigrated in the North. When the institution of slavery was condemned and threatened by the North, many southerners felt that their very survival and way of life was at risk.…

    • 1279 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Question 1: How did slavery affect politics between 1800 and 1860? This time era is the pre-civil war era in America. The tensions were quite high between these years only growing tighter. The North was doing all it could to stop the South and its expansion of slavery into the new western territories. The main political goal of the North was in fact to stop the expansion of slavery not abolish it from the South.…

    • 1810 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Compromise Of 1850 Essay

    • 1860 Words
    • 8 Pages

    Two years later, the Kansas-Nebraska Act was passed by President Fillmore. This act was much more isolating, splitting the Democratic Party according to sectional interests and increasing the Republican Party. Other than that, it was basically the same as the Compromise of 1850. The struggle between the North and South fighting over Kansas led to people soon flooding into Kansas to fight about slavery, which leads to the “Crime against Kansas”, also known as one of the most famous political historical events. (Senator Charles Sumner talks smack about Preston Brooks relative, and Brooks beats him with a…

    • 1860 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The Missouri Compromise of 1820 brought Missouri into America as a slave state and Maine as a free state. Everything above the Louisiana Purchase Boundary line, with the exception of Missouri, banned slavery. This action resulted in maintaining an equal representation for both the North and the South in the Senate. Following this, the Compromise of 1850 allowed California to be admitted as a free state, however popular sovereignty would be used in the land of the Mexican Cession. This caused controversy within the states.…

    • 1394 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    The book, “American Slavery: 1619-1877” written by Peter Kolchin and published first in 1993 and then published with revisions in 2003, takes an in depth look at American slavery throughout the country’s early history, from the pre-Revolutionary War period to the post-Civil War period. The first chapter deals with the origins of slavery within the United States. It discusses the introduction of slavery to the nation even before it was officially a nation. The colonies in the United States were agricultural and the cultivation of crops required labor.…

    • 1794 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    As The United states began a time of expansion into the west in the late 1830’s, debates over whether or not slavery would be permitted in those territories vacated by the native Americans caused great disagreements in Government and Society. While slavery is the most obvious reason for succession, Westward expansion and the rights of the new states were responsible for much of the violent conflicts that lead to the Civil War. States struggled to find common ground, but the differences between North and South and new Immigration made A series of compromises were created but by 1860 compromise had failed. Southerners feared an increase in free states would create an imbalance of power and create an advantage to the abolition of slavery.…

    • 876 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Civil War Perspectives

    • 1870 Words
    • 8 Pages

    The Civil War was a pivotal moment in the United States’s history being a high point in a sectional discord that’s affects have continued to be evident in several issues in today’s society. As most wars, there’s at least two decidedly divided and biased sides to the story. With two perspectives coming from one country America had to decide how they wanted to remember this war. Being such a complex dispute with two very distinct viewpoints, each side had their personal view on the reasons for the war, the events throughout the war, and the effectiveness of reconstruction. Through extensive measures by multiple people, each side go their story out and shaped how others viewed the war decades after the fact, no matter how contrasting these memories…

    • 1870 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Introduction The American Civil war occurred during the years 1861 – 1865, and as stated in the article titled “The Civil War”, it “was the cauldron that created modern America. The war preserved the Union, ending the possibility of the American nation dividing into two or more separate countries, in the process altering the nations politics and government, creating a strong presidency and an increasingly important federal infrastructure” (Finkelman sec. 1) However, the American Civil War did not come without coast, as wars never do, an estimated 620,000 men lost their lives in the line of duty. One of the many, yet major causes of this war, came about through slavery; and the standpoint that the northern states took, wanting to abolish slavery,…

    • 1146 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays