The ideas of Manifest Destiny



Topic 2Attempts to maintain the Union, c1845–185473354324959900TopicSubtopicsLearntRetrievedAssessed2.1 Westward expansion and its impact on North and SouthThe ideas of Manifest DestinyControversy over the new territories acquired by victory over Mexico2.2 Attempts at political compromiseThe Wilmot ProvisoThe Compromise of 1850Texas and CaliforniaThe role of personalities such as Zachary Taylor, Stephen Douglas and Henry ClayThe Fugitive Slave Law2.3 The growth of abolitionist sentiment in the NorthPolitical leaders such as William SewardActivists such as John BrownPopular literature and the pressThe cultural and economic influence of European immigrants arriving in the northern states2.4 Reactions against abolitionism in the SouthPolitical leaders such as Jefferson DavisPopular literature and the press2.1 Westward expansion and its impact on North and SouthThe ideas of Manifest DestinyManifest Destiny was a 19th-century belief that the expansion of the United States across to the Pacific Ocean was both justified and God’s intention. The phrase was coined in 1845 by John O’Sullivan.Where does Manifest Destiny link to the course more broadly?1803: Louisiana Purchase (pre-dates the term being coined)1845: Polk’s annexation of Texas1846-48: Mexican War1846: Oregon Treaty (Oregon territory was split with Britain at the 49th Parallel) Similarities between the North/South c.1845 – they both share beliefs in Manifest DestinyDifferences between the North/South c.1845 – Manifest Destiny raised the question of whether slavery would be allowed in new territories when admitted as states into the Union.Controversy over the new territories acquired by victory over MexicoCauses of the Mexican WarNECESSARY PRECONDITIONSSlaveryManifest DestinyAmerican’s settling into Texas:During the 1820s American settled in Texas (with their slaves), even though Texas belonged to Mexico. In 1829, Mexico passed a law that banned slavery, and in the following year prohibited the immigration of American’s into Texas. American-Texans ignored both laws and could do so because the Mexican government was too weak to enforce its authority. By 1835, there were about 300,000 American immigrants in Texas (+5000 slaves).DEVELOPING CAUSESTexas declared independence from Mexico. American-Texans resented attempts by Mexican President (Santa Anna) to enforce Mexican authority. Over the winter of 1835-6, Texas declared independence. Santa Anna marched north with a large army. A force of 187 Texans put up a spirited defence in March 1836 but were killed. President Jackson sympathised with the Texans but sent no official help. However, hundreds of Americans from the south/west rushed to help. In April 1836, an American-Texan army defeated the Mexicans at the Battle of San Jacinto. Santa Anna was captured and forced to recognise Texan independence. However, Mexico did not ratify Santa Anna’s actions.The issue of Texas was ‘shelved’ (ignored) by PresidentsMost Texans, with southern support, hoped to join the USA. Many Northerners however, opposed the move. They feared that it would lead to the spread of slavery, which would tilt the balance of free/slave states in the Senate. Jackson shelved the issue, so did his Presidential successor Martin van Buren. For a few years, therefore, Texas was an independent republic, unrecognised by Mexico and rejected by America.Then James Polk came along…Texas became a major issue during the 1844 presidential election. Democrat James Polk was elected on a PLATFORM that promised the annexation of Texas and Oregon (claimed by Britain). Outgoing President (Tyler) was anxious to leave his mark and secured a JOINT RESOLTUION OF CONGRESS in favour of ANNEXING Texas. Texas was admitted as a state in 1845. The annexation of Texas angered Mexico, who still claimed SOVEREIGNITY over Texas. Furthermore, the USA inherited a boundary dispute between Texas and Mexico and rapid changes in Mexican leadership meant the USA never knew whom to deal with in Mexico.TRIGGER CAUSEThe Rio Grande…In 1845, Polk sent US troops to the disputed border area (north of the Rio Grande River), hoping to provoke an incident that would result in war (and lead to the annexation of California and New Mexico also). In May 1846, Mexican troops ambushed US troops in the disputed area, killing/wounding 16 men. Polk declared that Mexicans had ‘shed American blood on American soil’, and asked Congress to declare war. They obliged.Course of the Mexican War132080250873002286002393950America had a smaller army, but a population twice the size of Mexico’s. America had a stronger industrial base, and therefore more military potential. America’s main advantages were: superior artillery; junior officers trained at West Point (US military academy); enthusiastic volunteers and naval supremacy.13462019532400When rumours of war with Mexico reached California, Fremont took it upon himself to assist settlers in uprising and proclaiming California as independent from Mexico. A month later the US navy arrived in Monterey and San Francisco Harbours, and raised an American flag.13462010858500Stephen Watts Kearny occupied Santa Fe (New Mexico) on 18th August 1846, without a shot being fired. 13488827133300The bulk of fighting was in central Mexico. In February 1847, Taylor defeated Santa Anna’s army at the Battle of Buena Vista. Mexico still refuse to accept defeat. Polk ordered American forces under Winfield Scott to march inland towards Mexico City – they went onto OCCUPY Mexico’s capital. End of the Mexican War: Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (1848)The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, signed on February 2, 1848, ended the Mexican War in favour of the United States. More land could have been taken, but there was restraint by Congress, leading to a more limited settlement.Terms of the TreatyMEXICAN SECESSION LAND: The treaty added an additional 525,000 square miles to United States territory, including the land that makes up present-day Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming.Mexico gave up all claims to Texas Mexico recognised the Rio Grande as America’s southern boundary.In return, the United States paid Mexico $15 million and agreed to settle all claims of U.S. citizens against Mexico844553619502.1 The Big PictureBoth the North and the South wanted to expand into the West; they both believed in Manifest Destiny.However, with Westward Expansion came tension about slavery and whether it could expand into the West. This is an area where the North and South disagreed.The Missouri Compromise was a federal law that determined the status of slavery inside the Louisiana Purchase Territory. However, the Mexican War saw America acquire 525,000 square miles of territory that was not in the Louisiana Purchase territory. Therefore, there was no federal law on the status of slavery in this new territory.This sets the scene going into the 1850s….002.1 The Big PictureBoth the North and the South wanted to expand into the West; they both believed in Manifest Destiny.However, with Westward Expansion came tension about slavery and whether it could expand into the West. This is an area where the North and South disagreed.The Missouri Compromise was a federal law that determined the status of slavery inside the Louisiana Purchase Territory. However, the Mexican War saw America acquire 525,000 square miles of territory that was not in the Louisiana Purchase territory. Therefore, there was no federal law on the status of slavery in this new territory.This sets the scene going into the 1850s….2.2 Attempts at political compromiseThe Wilmot Proviso (1846)What is the Wilmot Proviso?4486275146478This finance bill was deciding how the Mexican War would be paid for00This finance bill was deciding how the Mexican War would be paid for-158750133306The North has a bigger population, and therefore a majority in the House of Representative. The Senate is 2 per state00The North has a bigger population, and therefore a majority in the House of Representative. The Senate is 2 per state 8879205140970This finance bill was deciding how the Mexican War would be paid forThis finance bill was deciding how the Mexican War would be paid for2436717780487489516827500-25160781354The Compromise of 1850Short term background of the 1850 Compromise 16917511558000717558890001846: Wilmot Proviso73670269166001847: Calhoun’s ‘The Platform of the South’ – In this document (also known as the Calhoun Doctrine), Calhoun argued that citizens from every state had the right to take their property into any territory. Congress, in his opinion, had no authority to restrict slavery in the territories. If the northern majority continued to affect southern rights, Calhoun said there would be no option but to secede.73670166920001847: 30th Congress - Polk and some others thought the 36o30 line should be extended across to the pacific. Slavery would be banned above it and protected below it. This idea failed to pass through Congress (it was opposed by northerners). 7367016827000Popular Sovereignty – mid-Western Democratic Senators Lewis Cass and Stephen Douglas became associated with POPULAR SOVEREINGNTY, which is the view that Settlers, not Congress, should decide whether a territory should or should not allow slaves.73660538075001848: Election of Zachary Taylor. The Whigs nominated Zachary Taylor as their Presidential candidate. Whilst he was a Louisiana Slave owner, the party had no official platform on the expansion of slavery. Therefore, the Whigs could conduct a TWO-FACED CAMPAIGN (anti-slavery in the North and pro-slavery in the South). This election saw a new political party, the FREE-SOIL PARTY run its first candidate (Martin Van Buren). The Democrats nominated Lewis Cass and rallied around the idea of popular sovereignty. Taylor’s win was not sectional (he won 8/15 slave states and 7/15 free states). The Free-Soil party won 10% of the vote.7171711763560071717339554001849: 31st Congress – This Congress was dominated by debates about slavery. Northern Representatives who dominated the House of Representatives reaffirmed the Wilmot Proviso. John Calhoun issued his Address to the People of the Southern States to unite southern Congressmen. However, his tactic failed because southern Whigs at this point trusted Taylor. Ergo, only 48 members of Congress signed the address (about 1/3 of slave state members).California and New Mexico: Both applied to become states quicker than expected. California had seen a GOLD RUSH, leading to 100,000 people settling in California (which was enough to apply for statehood). New Mexico (as it is referred to at this point) was a huge territory that later became several states including Utah, New Mexico and Arizona. Whilst California would be admitted as a state, New Mexico be argued about in terms of slavery in the territories.? New Mexico did not join as a state until 1912!7171734660300March-December 1849: Congress’ sitting ended in March, and they would not meet until December. In this time Zachary Taylor got California and New Mexico to draw up constitutions and immediately apply for admission as states. They were likely to apply as free states. This annoyed southerners who had done most of the fighting in the Mexican War. When Congress met back in December 1849 there were fist fights between Congressmen. Taylor was not sympathetic to the South, prepared to use the army to prevent secession.So… why was the 1850 Compromise brought in?Tension between free and slave states was hitting dangerous levelsThey needed to decide the status of slavery in the new territories (they were not covered by the Missouri Compromise because they were not in the Louisiana Purchase Territory) Henry Clay stepped forward (as he did during the Missouri Compromise and Nullification Crisis)Terms of the 1850 Compromise:TERMS OF THE COMPROMISEHOW DID IT PASS?California admitted as a free stateHouse: 150–56Senate 34–18As an OMNIBUS BILL (a law made up of 5 parts), the 1850 Compromise failed to pass through both Houses of Congress.However, Stephen Douglas separated the bill out into 5 separate laws so that they would pass.Utah and New Mexico to be organised into territories without restrictions on slavery (Popular Sovereignty)House: 97–85Slave TRADE to end in Washington D.C.Stricter Fugitive Slave Law introducedHouse: 109–76Senate: 27-12Texas surrender land to New Mexico (border dispute) and in return Congress will assume the $10 million debt Texas owed857252286000Debates in Congress surrounding the 1850 CompromiseTexas and CaliforniaTexasCaliforniaDuring the 1820’s, American settled in Texas, (with their slaves), even though Texas belonged to Mexico. By 1835, there were about 300,000 American immigrants in Texas (+5000 slaves).Over the winter of 1835-6, Texas declared independence from Mexico. In April 1836, an American-Texan army, defeated the Mexicans at the battle of San Jacinto. Santa Anna was captured and forced to recognise Texan independence. Geographically huge, the division of the state of Texas was frequently proposed in the early decades of Texan statehood, particularly in the decades immediately prior to the US Civil war.California became part of America as part of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (1848). At the time, America was divided equally between 15?free states?and 15?slave states. With the addition of territory from Mexico, the debate over slavery intensified dramatically.The land in California was not that fertile and unsuited to the cash crops that slaves were used for elsewhere. However, many slave-owning Southerners had travelled to California to seek their fortunes in the 1849 Gold Rush, and many brought their slaves. Many miners expressed concern that slaveholders accompanied by slaves had an unfair advantage in the mining camps. In October 1849, the first?California Constitution?Convention was held. One of the most heated debates of the Convention was on the status of slavery in the new state. However, the?Compromise of 1850?later permitted California to be admitted to the Union as a free state. Geographically large, California could have been divided at the 36o30 line two make one free state and one slave states.The role of personalities such as Zachary Taylor, Stephen Douglas and Henry Clay Zachary TaylorStephen DouglasHenry ClayPHOTO350520444500021262344450001249944445000BASICSWealthy planter family from Kentucky.? He was a southerner and a slave holder (not a northern abolitionist).CAREER UP UNTIL 1850Taylor became a national hero due to his victories in the Mexican war, War of 1812, Black Hawk war and Second Seminole War (nicked named ‘Old Rough and ready’ due to his exploits here).? He (somehow) beat Clay to the Whig nomination in 1848, despite having no political experience or clear political ideology/policies. He was very reluctant to even say which way he would vote but finally was convinced to declare as a Whig and then with the backing of Crittenden, Seward and Lincoln was nominated. The split in the Democrats with the creation of the Free-Soil Party helped him win the election.? He opposed the expansion of slavery to the West and his actions in promoting California and New Mexico as free states caused huge amounts of tension.? His days in office were full of the compromise that he did not support and a scandal (Galphin affair that involved corruption by his secretary for war Crawford).? Taylor died 4th?July 1850, after eating lots of raw fruit and iced milk.? It is said that his death helped hold off hostility between North and South and that had he lived he may have caused a war.Douglas (Democrat)- Was a member of the House of Representatives then Senator (from 1847) for Illinois.? He had also been secretary for state in Illinois and been a judge in the Illinois Supreme Court.? His wife inherited a plantation with 100 slaves (which they hired a manger to look after).? He represented the mid-west, the new expansionist America, full of frontier spirt and dynamism seeing itself as different to the old Eastern seaboard states dominated by the old elites.? He saw railways as key to the prosperity of Illinois and the West. Douglas’s brain child was popular sovereignty.Played a key compromising role in Missouri and Nullification.He represents Kentucky which is a boarder state and therefore more likely to favour compromise.? He is arguably the greatest ever American stateman to never be President (Stephen Douglas may dispute this).? He was right at the end of his career at the point of 1850 (died 1852) and is one of the great older statemen that Davis blames for not sorting out the issue when it was still possible.The Fugitive Slave Law (1850)What did the 1850 Fugitive Slave Law say?FEDERAL MARSHALS to raises POSSES to pursue fugitives on northern soil. Those who refused to join risked an $1000 fine.FEDERAL COMMISSIONERS could determine the fate of alleged fugitives without a jury trial or testimony. (slavery more important than states’ rights?)The law did not apply to just recent runaway slaves, but fugitives from decades previousAny person aiding a runaway slave (by providing food or shelter) was subject to six months' imprisonment and a $1,000 fineHow did different groups react to the 1850 Fugitive Slave Law?ABOLITIONISTSAbolitionists aided fugitive slaves by violently resisting recapture.An owner who tried to recapture his slave was killed in Pennsylvania. A newspaper headline on this incident read: ‘Civil War – the first blow struck’1854: a Boston mob broke into a courthouse and killed a guard to rescue fugitive slave Anthony Burns. In the end, federal troops had to be sent in to escort Burns to Boston harbour where a ship carried him back into slavery. (The people of Boston later purchased Burn’s freedom).SLAVESThousands of Fugitive slaves fled to the safety of Canada (3000 entered Canada in last 3 month of 1850)They used UNDERGROUND RAILROADS (a network of secret routes and safe houses) to get there.MODERATEAccept the Fugitive Slave law as the price they had to pay to save the Union.9 states passed PERSONAL LIBERTY LAWS, mandating a jury trial before alleged fugitive slaves could be moved; others forbade the use of local jails or the assistance of state officials in the arrest or return of alleged fugitive slaves.02788602.2 The Big PictureIn the 1850’s there are many attempts by the government to secure compromise, some of these attempts fail to pass through Congress and become law. However, the 1850 Compromise does manage to pass through Congress and become a federal (national) law.However, there is clearly tension. The 1850 Compromise only passed when Stephen Douglas broke the 1850 Compromise down into 5 separate laws, using moderates to ensure a majority vote.Moderates accept the Compromise and will follow aspects such as the Fugitive Slave Law. However, abolitionists refuse and take measures to prevent the Fugitive Slave law from being implemented.002.2 The Big PictureIn the 1850’s there are many attempts by the government to secure compromise, some of these attempts fail to pass through Congress and become law. However, the 1850 Compromise does manage to pass through Congress and become a federal (national) law.However, there is clearly tension. The 1850 Compromise only passed when Stephen Douglas broke the 1850 Compromise down into 5 separate laws, using moderates to ensure a majority vote.Moderates accept the Compromise and will follow aspects such as the Fugitive Slave Law. However, abolitionists refuse and take measures to prevent the Fugitive Slave law from being implemented.2.3 The growth of abolitionist sentiment in the NorthPolitical leaders such as William SewardName/photoBackstory -274417824300William SewardSeward was born in Orange Country, New York, where his father was a farmer and owned slaves. Seward spent some time in Georgia, where he witnessed slaveryPost-university, Seward settled in Auburn, where he was a lawyer, but became involved with Politics.Seward was sworn in as state senator for New York in January 1831.During his time in the Senate the?Whig Party?gradually came into being.In 1834 Seward lost his re-election bid for the Senate, and so returned to law. In 1835 Seward and his wife undertook a lengthy trip (including Virginia). He saw scenes of slavery which strengthened his opposition to the institution.Seward re-entered politics, and in 1849 became senator for New York (1849).Career in the 1850s1850 Compromise: Seward made a speech on March 11, 1850, invoked a "higher law than the Constitution"Underground railroad: In the 1850s, the Seward family opened their Auburn home as a safehouse to fugitive slavesKansas-Nebraska Act: William Seward would rally against the Kansas-Nebraska Act when it was introduced into Congress.Beating of Sumner: Seward had read a draft of Sumer’s speech, and advised him to omit the personal references.Dred Scott: Seward accused Buchanan and?Taney?of conspiring to gain the result, and threatened to reform the courts to eliminate Southern power. Taney said if Seward had been elected in 1860, he would have refused to take the oath of office.Harper’s Ferry: Despite spending 1859 in Europe, some southerners believed Seward’s had inspired John Brown. To rebut such allegations, (and to try and win the 1860 Presidential nomination) Seward said (in the Senate) that Brown was justly punished.1860 Election: Seward lost the Presidential nomination to Lincoln but was made Secretary of State after the election.Secession: Seward favoured compromise.? Seward proposed a constitutional amendment preventing federal interference with slavery.? He hinted that?New Mexico Territory?might be a slave state, and urged the construction of two transcontinental railroads, one northern, one southern. Fort Sumter: Seward, recommended to Lincoln that an attempt to resupply Sumter would be provocative to the border states. Seward hinted to the Confederate commissioners that Sumter would be surrendered. Yet, Lincoln was loath to give up Sumter…Name/photoBackstory -274417898600Thaddeus StevensStevens was born in rural Vermont, in poverty, and with a?club foot.Stevens graduated from Dartmouth in 1814 and began to?study law. Stevens moved to Gettysburg where he opened a legal office.In 1833, Stevens was elected to a one-year term in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives.Stevens's reason from supporting abolitionist is disputed; Richard Current suggested it was out of ambition and Fawn Brodie, suggested it was out of identification with the downtrodden, based on his handicap.? At the?1837 Pennsylvania constitutional convention, Stevens, fought against the?disenfranchisement?of African-Americans.?After he moved to Lancaster, he became active in the?Underground Railroad, not only defending people believed to be fugitive slaves, but coordinating the movements of those seeking freedom. Career in the 1850sIn 1848 Steven’s won election as Senator for Pennsylvania.Stevens spoke out against the?1850 Compromise; in June, as the debates continued, he stated, "This word 'compromise' when applied to human rights and constitutional rights I abhor".In 1851, Stevens was one of the defence lawyers in the trial of 38 African Americans and three others in federal court in Philadelphia on treason charges. The defendants had been implicated in the so-called?Christiana Riot, in which an attempt to enforce a Fugitive Slave Act warrant had resulted in the killing of the slaveowner.? He joined the Republican party after its formation.Stevens took his seat in the?36th United States Congress?in December 1859, only days after the hanging of?John Brown, who had attacked the federal arsenal at?Harpers Ferry?hoping to cause a slave insurrection. Stevens opposed Brown's violent actions at the time, though later, he was more approving.?Following the election of Lincoln, Stevens was unyielding in opposing efforts to appease the southerners, such as the?Crittenden Compromise, which would have enshrined slavery as beyond constitutional amendment.Name/photoBackstory Salmon P. Chase-63501016000Chase was born in?Cornish,?New Hampshire, on January 13, 1808He studied at?Dartmouth College, before moving to the?District of Columbia, where he opened a classical school while studying law.?Chase moved to Ohio,?and practiced law in?Cincinnati?from 1830.From the beginning, despite the risk to his livelihood,?he defended people who escaped?slavery?and those tried for assisting them.Chase was a member of the literary?Semi-Colon Club; members included Harriet Beecher Stowe. For his defence of people arrested in Ohio under the?Fugitive Slave Act of 1793, Chase was dubbed the "Attorney General for Fugitive Slaves".Chase drafted the Free-Soil platform,?and it was chiefly through his influence that?Van Buren?was their nominee for President in 1848.In 1849, Chase was elected to the U.S Senate from Ohio on the Free-Soil ticket.Career in the 1850sDuring his service in the Senate (1849–1855), Chase was an anti-slavery champion. He argued against the?Compromise of?1850?and the?Kansas–Nebraska Act.After the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska legislation and the subsequent?violence in Kansas, Chase left the Democratic party to help form the Republican Party.The "Appeal of the Independent Democrats in Congress to the People of the United States", written by Chase and Giddings, and published in?The New York Times?on January 24, 1854, may be regarded as the earliest draft of the Republican party creed. Chase sought the Republican nomination during the 1860 election.?Except for?William?H. Seward, Chase was the most prominent Republican in the country and had done more against slavery than any other Republican. But he opposed a "protective tariff", favored by most other Republicans, and his record of collaboration with Democrats annoyed many Republicans who were former Whigs.He would become Secretary of Treasury under Abraham Lincoln.Name/photoBackstory Charles Sumner-63501016000Sumner was born in?Boston, son of a liberal?Harvard-educated lawyer,?and abolitionist. Sumner's father told Sumner that freeing the slaves would "do us no good" unless they were treated equally by society.Charles Sumner attended the?Boston Latin School, where he counted?abolitionists such as?Wendell Phillips, among his closest friends. He graduated in 1830 from Harvard.In 1834, Sumner entered private practice in Boston. A visit to Washington decided him against a political career, and he returned to Boston resolved to practice law.Sumner travelled to Europe (1837). Sumner noted that one lecturer (in France) had 2 or 3 black attendees and their colour was ‘no objection’. This fuelled his abolitionist views. In 1840, Sumner returned to Boston to practice law but also lectured at Harvard Law.Following Texas’ annexation, Sumner took an active role in the anti-slavery movement.Sumner represented the plaintiffs in?Roberts v. Boston, a case which challenged the legality of?segregation. Sumner’s arguments in this case would be made in?Brown v. Board of Education?over a century later.Career in the 1850sIn 1851, Free Soilers’ named Sumner their choice for U.S. Senator. The Democrats initially opposed him and called for a less radical candidate. However, Sumner was elected by a one-vote majority on April 24, 1851.?As a Senator, Sumner attacked the?1850 Fugitive Slave Act.In 1856, during the "Bleeding Kansas" crisis, Sumner denounced the?Kansas–Nebraska Act.Sumner verbally attacked the authors of the Act, Stephen A. Douglas?and Andrew Butler?Representative?Preston Brooks (Butler's cousin), was infuriated. He intended to challenge Sumner to a duel, but having consulted on dueling etiquette decided that dueling was for gentlemen of equal social standing, and that Sumner was no better than a drunkard. Brooks said that he concluded that since Sumner was no gentleman, it would be more appropriate to beat him with his cane. Two days later, Brooks confronted Sumner and beat him severely using a thick?gutta-percha?cane with a gold head. Sumner was knocked down and trapped under the heavy desk, which was bolted to the floor. Brooks continued to strike Sumner until Sumner ripped the desk from the floor. By this time, Sumner was blinded by his own blood, and he staggered up the aisle and collapsed, lapsing into unconsciousness. Brooks beat the motionless Sumner until his cane broke, at which point he continued to strike Sumner with the remaining piece.[28]?Several other Senators attempted to help Sumner, but were blocked by Keitt, who brandished a pistol and shouted, "Let them be!" Activists such as John BrownName/photoKey information-274418193300John BrownBorn in 1800In 1837, (following the murder of?Elijah P. Lovejoy), Brown publicly vowed: "I consecrate my life to the destruction of slavery!"In 1846, Brown Perkins moved to the ideologically?progressive?city of?Springfield, Massachusetts (lots of abolitionists live here!!)In 1850, the United States passed the?Fugitive Slave Act.In response Brown founded a militant group to prevent slaves' capture, the League of Gileadites.?In 1855, Brown left for Kansas, and would becoming involved in the violence at Bleeding Kansas. ?John Brown?led his sons and other followers to plan the murder of settlers who spoke in favour of slavery.William Lloyd Garrison-25403941800Promoted “moral suasion,” or nonviolent and non-political resistance, to achieve emancipation. Although he initially supported colonization, Garrison later gave his support to programs that focused on immediate emancipation without repatriation. In 1831, he began publishing?The Liberator, the single most important abolitionist publication, and later led the American Anti-Slavery Society. His vociferous language and his very presence outraged anti-abolitionist Northerners who attacked him, sometimes physically, with mob-driven violence. Frederick Douglas-31752921000Under Garrison’s mentorship, Douglass adopted “moral suasion” as an abolitionist strategy. Impatient with this approach, Douglass later broke from Garrison, believing that political activism was the only way to achieve freedom. Although vehement in his rhetoric, Douglas refused to use violence. Indeed, he refused to defend or take part in John Brown’s raid at Harper’s Ferry. Douglass wrote three autobiographies, edited four newspapers, lectured nationally and internationally, and recruited black soldiers for the Civil War. He advised and pressured Lincoln to make slavery the single most important issue of the Civil War and remained committed to integration and civil rights for all Americans throughout his life.Sojourner Truth-31753365500She was one of the best known and esteemed black women of the nineteenth century. Sojourner gained her freedom when New York abolished slavery in 1827. A pacifist, she transformed herself into an activist for abolitionism and proclaimed her new identity by changing her name to Sojourner Truth.Her anti-slavery activities included recruiting black troops, publishing her narrative, and winning a civil rights lawsuit. Her circle of influence included both black and white allies as well as several presidents. Gerrit Smith58834550400His conversion to abolitionism occurred in 1835, when he attended an abolitionist conference in Utica, New York. The meeting was disrupted by a violent mob of anti-abolitionists. Consequently, Smith offered his New York estate to house the conference and, there, made a powerful speech.He became the president of the New York Anti-Slavery Society for three years. Smith served as Station Master of the Underground railroad and sold portions of his land to fugitive slaves for the nominal fee of one dollar. Gerrit Smith was also one of the Secret Six, a group of supporters who gave financial assistance to John Brown for his raid at Harper’s Ferry. Smith ran for president three times and was the only abolitionist to hold a Congressional officePopular literature and the pressPopular Abolitionist Press.The LiberatorThe North StarGarrison co-published weekly issues of The Liberator from Boston (January 1831 - December 1865). It publicly criticised the doctrine of GRADUALISM. Its circulation was only about 3,000, and three-quarters of subscribers were African Americans in 1834The newspaper was uncompromising in its advocacy of "immediate and complete emancipation of all slaves”. Garrison set the tone for the paper in his famous open letter "To the Public" in the first issue. The Liberator faced harsh resistance from several state legislatures and local groups: (1) North Carolina indicted Garrison for felonious acts (2) Vigilance Association of Columbia, South Carolina, offered a reward of $1,500 ($25,957.20 in 2005 dollars) to those who identified distributors of the paper.Published by abolitionist Frederick Douglass. The paper was mainly funded by English supporters, who gave Douglass five hundred pounds to use as he chose. The North Star was inspired by The Liberator, but Douglass would go on to fall out with Garrison (different ideologies on abolitionism and competition between the two). It was sold by subscription at $2 per year to more than 4,000 readers in the U.S., Europe, and the West Indies. The paper was not a financial success. Douglass earned extra money lecturing and even re-mortgaged his home in 1848 to keep the newspaper going. By 1851, financial difficulties caused him to merge The North Star with the Liberty Party Paper, a newspaper published by the abolitionist Gerrit Smith.Anti-Slavery BugleThe Christian RecorderPublished from June 20, 1845, to May 4, 1861. After five issues the paper moved to Salem, Ohio. Salem was home to many Quakers, who were involved with the Underground Railroad, providing more subscribers. James Barnaby was the publisher of the paper and received support from the Anti-Slavery Society. This allowed the paper to continue to be in circulation for 18 years and was shipped to other states, including Illinois, Iowa, Indiana and Wisconsin. Later, the paper expanded to include the Women’s Right Movement. It ran Sojourner Truth’s “Ain't I a Woman?”The Christian Recorder?is the oldest existing periodical published by African-Americans in the United States whose existence dated before the Civil War. It had its genesis in The Christian Herald, which was established by the General Conference that was held in Philadelphia in 1848. The Christian Herald was published weekly with subscribers paying one dollar and fifty cents a year. It was read by black communities across the North in the pre-Civil war era and then spread into the South during Reconstruction.The National EraThe National Era was an abolitionist newspaper that ran from 1847 to 1860. Published weekly in Washington D.C., it contained seven columns and was four pages long. The National Era proposed gradual rather than immediate emancipation. Was noted for the first publication, as a serial, of Harriet Beecher Stowe's Uncle Tom's Cabin (1851). Uncle Tom’s CabinThe BasicsReactions Harriet Beecher Stowe was the daughter of a famous preacher from the SECOND GREAT AWAKENING and had only visited a plantation once (briefly)She wrote Uncle Tom’s Cabin to highlight the injustice of the Fugitive Slave Law (1850) and horrors of slavery.It was first published in the National Era, before being published as a book.Her writing was based on abolitionist literature and in particular the life of JOSIAH HENSON, a former slave. However, her writings contain numerous negative racial stereotypes.Best-selling novel of the 19th century and the second best-selling book of that century, following the Bible. In the first year after it was published, 300,000 copies of the book were sold in the United States:,one million copies in Great Britain. Lincoln supposedly said to her in 1862: ‘So you’re the little woman who wrote the book that started this great war!Outraged people in the South. Reactions ranged from a bookseller in Mobile, Alabama, being forced to leave town for selling the novel to threatening letters sent to Stowe (including a package containing a slave's severed ear). Some critics highlighted Stowe's paucity of life-experience relating to Southern life, saying that it led her to create inaccurate descriptions of the region. For instance, she had never been to a Southern plantation. However, Stowe always said she based the characters of her book on stories she was told by runaway slaves in Cincinnati. The cultural and economic influence of European immigrants arriving in the northern statesImmigration to AmericaMost of the immigrants coming to the United States came from Ireland and Germany, but some also came from China, Britain, and the Scandinavian countries. In the 1840s, Ireland experienced a potato blight, and consequently tens of thousands of Irish fled the country to America. When they arrived in the US, they were too poor to move west and buy land, so they congregated in large cities along the eastern coast. By 1850, the Irish made up over half the populations of Boston and New York City.Irish experience in AmericaThe Irish accepted whatever wages employers offered them, working in steel mills, warehouses, and shipyards or with construction gangs building canals and railways. As they competed for jobs, they were often confronted with “No Irish Need Apply” signs. Race riots were common between the Irish and the free African Americans who competed for the same low-status jobs.Irish immigrants were perceived as lived in crowded, dirty tenement buildings, plagued by high crime rates, infectious disease, prostitution, and alcoholism. They were stereotyped as being ignorant, lazy, and dirty. They also faced severe anti-Catholic prejudices. Partially due to the hostility they faced, the Irish cultivated a strong cultural identity in America, developing neighbourhood newspapers, strong Catholic churches, political groups, and societies. However, many eventually improved their position by acquiring small amounts of property. The Irish eventually controlled the police department in New York City, driving around in police vans called “paddy wagons.”In the 1820s and 1830s, state constitutions were revised to permit universal white-male suffrage, and as a group, the Irish found their way into American politics and were able to exert a remarkable political influence. They primarily followed the Democrats and Andrew Jackson, who was the son of an Irish colonist. Irish votes enabled Jackson to defeat John Quincy Adams in the election of 1828. By the turn of the twentieth century, the Irish had established political machines such as New York’s “Tammany Hall” and virtually ran the municipal government in and around New York.Know Nothing PartyIn 1849, nativists formed a group in New York called the “Order of the Star Spangled Banner,” which developed into a political party called the “American Party.” When asked about the organization, members refused to identify themselves saying, “I know nothing,” which eventually led the group to be labelled the “Know-Nothing” Party. Winfield Scott’s conduct of the 1852 presidential election for the Whig Party had been inept. But one aspect had major consequences. Scott had gone out of his way to flatter the Irish and German voters. This greatly annoyed the Nativist Whigs and strengthened a conviction that a new party would spring out of the ruins of the Whig defeat. Dynamic social and economic change helped to precipitate the Whig collapse; it was not just a response to defeat at the polls. The anti-immigration lobby, or ‘Know Nothings’, began as secret societies. Know Nothings produced publications denouncing immigrants for their impious and dirty habits; immigrants were at the root of crime, drunkenness but above all, corruption. They attracted many Protestant voters agitated by a deep-seated fear of Catholicism. Anti-Catholicism then became associated with the reform programme of Protestant social activists campaigning for the abolition of slavery and the prohibition of alcohol. Between 1853 and 1855, the Know Nothings replaced the Whigs as the nation's second largest party. The Know Nothings swept to political victory in Massachusetts, Delaware, Pennsylvania, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Maryland, and Kentucky. They also ran strong races in Virginia, Tennessee, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas. By 1854, nativism seemed on the verge of carrying the entire country. However, the Know Nothing advance was too rapid for the movements own good. The more it advanced, the more difficult became the task of finding adequate, let alone able, candidates. It also attracted opportunists who lacked commitment. The Know Nothings proved unable to enact their legislative program, which called for:a 21-year residency period before immigrants could become citizens and vote;a limitation on political office holding to native-born Americans, andrestrictions on alcohol sales. In a desperate measure to retain sectional unity the Know Nothings supported the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854. This alienated northern anti-slavery elements who moved to support the Republicans. They were also politically outmanoeuvred by able politicians such as Salmon P. Chase in Ohio and Henry Wilson in Massachusetts who outflanked them with a Free-Soil appeal. Therefore, slavery destroyed the Know Nothings. Despite its political success in 1854 and 1855, the national Know Nothing Party could not survive the anti-slavery controversy. As the party gathered in Philadelphia in June 1855, a pro-slavery resolution led to a wild debate and a massive defection led by Massachusetts nativists but including Know Nothings from many states. Further divisions in the party created more problems.In 1855 Abraham Lincoln denounced the Know-Nothings in eloquent terms:‘I am not a Know-Nothing. That is certain. How could I be? How can anyone who abhors the oppression of negroes, be in favor of degrading classes of white people? Our progress in degeneracy appears to me pretty rapid. As a nation, we began by declaring that "all men are created equal." We now practically read it, "all men are created equal, except negroes." When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read "all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners, and Catholics." When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretence of loving liberty -- to Russia, for example, where despotism can be taken pure and without the base alloy of hypocrisy.’Nativism failed to inspire and unite the nation. Seeking to add southerners to their party eventually led to the splintering of the American party. At the June 1855 convention in Philadelphia, Southern members seized control and adopted a pro-slavery platform. As a result of this issue and the passing of the Kansas-Nebraska Act, anti-slavery Know Nothings left the American party and joined the new Republican party. It was clear what the Know Nothings opposed, but they had no positive message and a notorious habit for secrecy. They inspired ridicule and laughter. Newspapers gleefully published the secret rituals of the Know Nothings and jokesters set up Owe Nothing, Say Nothing, and Do Nothing societies.018637252.3 The Big PictureWhilst abolitionist had existed prior to the 1850s in America, in this period abolitionism became more prevalent in society.In particular, the release of Uncle Tom’s Cabin catalysed a growth in people who identified as abolitionists, and intensified southern perception of abolitionism. Abolitionist political figures are generally less radical than activists. This can be explained by the fact that politicians hold elected office, and therefore require the continued support of the electorate to retain their power. They cannot afford to be as radical as activists.002.3 The Big PictureWhilst abolitionist had existed prior to the 1850s in America, in this period abolitionism became more prevalent in society.In particular, the release of Uncle Tom’s Cabin catalysed a growth in people who identified as abolitionists, and intensified southern perception of abolitionism. Abolitionist political figures are generally less radical than activists. This can be explained by the fact that politicians hold elected office, and therefore require the continued support of the electorate to retain their power. They cannot afford to be as radical as activists.In 1856, the Know Nothings persuaded former President Millard Fillmore to run as their American Party candidate. Fillmore, who happened to be visiting Pope Pius IX at the Vatican at the time of his nomination, disavowed anti-Catholicism. Although Fillmore received twenty percent of the national popular vote, he carried only one state, Maryland. The Know-Nothing party was supplanted in the North by a new and explosive sectional party, the Republicans. By 1856 Northern workers felt more threatened by the Southern slave power than by the Pope and Catholic immigrants. At the same time, fewer Southerners were willing to support a party that ignored the question of the expansion of slavery. As a result, the Know-Nothing party rapidly dissolved.Nevertheless, the Know-Nothings left an indelible mark on American politics. The movement eroded loyalty to the national political parties, helped destroy the Whig party, and made the political system less capable of containing the divisive issue of slavery.2.4 Reactions against abolitionism in the SouthPolitical leaders such as Jefferson DavisJefferson DavisFire-EatersAs a child, Jefferson Davis moved to Louisiana and then Mississippi. His family owned a cotton plantation.He attended West Point (involved in the Eggnog riot)In 1844, Davis was elected to the House of RepresentativesDuring the Mexican War Davis raised a volunteer regiment, the?Mississippi Rifles. After the Mexican War, Davis went onto become a Senator.In 1848, Senator Davis introduced an amendment to the?Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo?that would have annexed most of north-eastern Mexico, but it failed on a vote of 11 to 44.Davis resigned as Senator (September 1851) to run for Governor of Mississippi on the issue of the?Compromise of 1850, which he opposed. He was defeated and was left without political office.Franklin Pierce, after winning the presidential election, made Davis his?Secretary of War?(1853).He promoted the?Gadsden Purchace; the Pierce administration agreed, and the land was purchased in December 1853.Davis was re-elected to the Senate when Pierce’s Presidency ended. Fire-Eaters?were a group of pro-slavery?Southern Democrats?who urged secession.As early as 1850, the movement was led by?Edmund Ruffin,?Robert Rhett,?Louis T. Wigfall, and?William Yancey.At an?1850 convention?in?Tennessee, the Fire-Eaters urged Southern secession.However, the?Compromise of 1850 abated the Fire-Eaters for a time.During the 1856, Fire-Eaters used threats of secession to persuade Northerners (who valued saving the Union over fighting slavery) to vote for Buchanan. They used events for propaganda, including "Bleeding Kansas" and the?Beating of Sumner Using effective propaganda, in 1860 the Fire-Eaters were able to convince many Southerners against Lincoln. Election of Franklin Pierce:It took 49 Ballots to nominate Pierce, with other contenders including Cass and Douglass.Pierce was a northerner who opposed abolitionist, and therefore was a COMPROMISE CANDIDATEThe Whig nomination took 53 nominations. Fillmore wants re-electing but the Whigs decide against this.This election would be the end for the Whigs, with them divided beyond repairNamePartyRaw%Electoral CollegeFranklin PierceDemocratic1,607,51050.84254Winfield ScottWhig1,386,94243.87%42OtherN/A164,7605.29%0Events in the Presidency of Franklin Pierce:Gadsden PurchaseJames Gadsden was an American DIPLOMAT and railroad entrepreneur. In 1853 he was US minister to Mexico.Pierce gave James Gadsden the authority to negotiate the purchase of 250,000 square miles of Mexican territory.Gadsden eventually agreed to purchase 54,000 square miles of Mexican territory.Southerners supported this purchase, not because of slavery potential but because it would assist the building of a southern railway to the Pacific.Yet, the Gadsden purchase caused tension because it only gained senate approval after a northern amendment slashed 9000 square miles. Buying land was seen as a pro-southern policy. The North were seen as interfering.CubaIn 1851, an American-sponsored FILIBUSTER expedition to try and overthrow the Spanish Cuban government failed.John Quitman (Mississippi’s former senator), planned a second expedition (1853-4). Several thousand American volunteers were recruited, and contact was made with Cuban rebels. Pierce met Quitman in 1853 and unofficially encouraged him to go ahead with his plans. Pierce’s main problem was northern opinion: northerners viewed filibustering as another example of southern efforts to expand slavery.Alarmed by northern reaction, Pierce forced Quitman to scuttle (abandon) the expedition.Ostend ManifestoPierce, still wants Cuba and authorised Pierre Soule (US minister in Spain) to offer up to $130 million for the islandIn October 1854, the US ministers to Britain (Buchanan), France (Mason), and Spain (Soule) met in Belgium and issued the Ostend ManifestoThe Ostend Manifesto stated that Cuba was as necessary to the North American Republic as any of its present members. If Spain refused to sell, then the USA would be ‘justified in wresting it from Spain’.Details of the manifesto were leaked and immediately denounced (declared as wrong) by northerners. Pierce rejected the Manifesto and Soule resigned. The Ostend Manifest angered northerners who believed that the South aspired to establish a Latin America slave empire (many southerners did and kept these hopes throughout the 1850’s).Popular literature and the pressAunt Phillis’ CabinAunt Phillis Cabin is a plantation fiction novel, focusing on plantation owners behaving benignly towards their slavesThe novel sold 20,000-30,000 copies, making it a strong commercial success and bestseller.Mary Henderson Eastman was a descendant of the First Families of Virginia and had grown up in slaveholding societyPlanter’s Northern BridePlanter's Northern Bride doesn’t portray white plantation owners behaving benignly toward their loyal slavesThe novel instead, criticised abolitionism in the United States and how easily anti-slavery organisations such as the Underground Railroad could be manipulated by pro-slavery superiors.Hentz was born in the North (Massachusetts), and in 1824 moved to North Carolina. She is described as being “a northerner who travelled and worked throughout the South for nearly thirty years.”Sword and DistaffThe novel focuses on the Revolutionary War and its aftermath through the lives of Captain Porgy and one of his slaves.It contains a number of sections and discussions that are clearly debating Stowe's book and view of slavery.William Gilmore Simms was from Charleston, South Carolina, and worked in the House of Representatives (1844-46)-257071068992.4 The Big PictureAs abolitionist increases, so does Southern reactions to abolitionism. It is important to remember that when abolitionist was marginal, so was southern reaction (they had nothing to react to!). 002.4 The Big PictureAs abolitionist increases, so does Southern reactions to abolitionism. It is important to remember that when abolitionist was marginal, so was southern reaction (they had nothing to react to!). ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download