William Seward was a leading anti-slavery figure who later became secretary of state in the Lincoln administration. He believed that the two systems held by the North and the South (free labour and slavery) were “incompatible”. He stated that eventually America would have to become either fully a free labour nation or a slaveholding nation. While not everyone felt so strongly about this in the North (many didn’t care about the slavery issue at all) it was a reason that soldiers and leaders on either side went to war and fought for (in the North to end it, in the South to defend it). Lincoln was of the opinion that while he would never accept the extension of slavery he would make no direct attempt to interfere with it where it existed.
They were for slavery because of the finical gain. The labor they didn’t have to do and taxes. They were against slavery because they felt that the government couldn’t control the importation of slavery. The position that the Connecticut delegates and Mr. Heath in the Massachusetts debate took in the lead role of not participate in the slave trade. This was done by prohibiting the importation of slaves.
For instance, the writer claims that the book Uncle Tom’s Cabin and its common predecessor who attacks the topic of slavery in order for the abolitionists to unite together and fight for the same beliefs, isn’t fair or moral since they were disrupting the peaceful state that the U.S was in and shifting the people apart even more. On the other hand, the other passage written by the Southern literary messenger of Richmond also opposed Mrs. Stowe;s tale but he/she had a very biased opinion towards the South so he/she just argued using his/her untrustworthy opinion and very little knowledge. For example, the messenger didn’t think that the author of the story should have put emphasis on the abolition actions since they didn’t deserve the attention and it was unfair for the South since they their opinions didn’t get noticed. 1) C-1 2) The Pro-Southern Court Speaks (1857) 3) Author: Roger Taney 4) Author’s Position: Against Dred Scott and his wish to become a free African American 5) Bias: The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court has the authority to speak for what he favors and in this case, his bias leaned toward the South so he supported them by going against Dred Scott. The Court also must cancel the Missouri Compromise since it goes against the constitution so they couldn’t
Just like these two there were many people who did not even like that there was a war in the first place but there was really no choice. Lincoln at one point did not even feel that he was capable enough of completely getting rid of slavery because he knew that it would cause problems in the future. He knew that abolishing slavery would turn the north and south against each other even more than it already had. (Pederson, Estell, & Kenneth, 1994). Just because he did not immediately take advantage of his position, probably do what any other would do today, and abolish slavery does not mean he supported it.
If the South had more people in Congress the South would be able to override the north in laws pertaining to the slaves. Another reason the South favored the Compromise was because it would not count the slaves in the taxes. (2) It said that since the North did not agree with slavery, if an escaped slave was found the northerner did not have to return them. (2) The North had a diverse view of the Three-Fifths Compromise. They did not want any slaves counted in the population total because the slaves had no voice in government, they did not vote or have any rights.
They did not like the idea of the slaves being treated as property. For most states in the North it was illegal to own slaves. The North tried to put a stop to slavery because they did not want it to expand into the West and become a problem with the economy. The North did not need slaves for their agriculture. On the other hand, the South was all for slavery.
The most widely area of criticism that Lincoln received was his use of unconventional and sometimes illegal methods in order to achieve his goals. Lincoln justified ignoring the process of going through congress to make such decisions in that he felt the war needed immediate and direct decisions and did not have time to go through the process for congress’ approval. The criticism appears to be fair as they come from a variety of different groups from the democrats and Lincoln’s unjust ways of handling the war as well as his own party, the Republicans for his handling of the south. In assessment of Abraham Lincoln’s tenure as president and handling of the civil war tragedy, it can be determined that although heavily criticized by his peers the civil war would not have been the “civil war” without him. The inevitability of the civil war came to light when Lincoln was elected President and indirectly caused the civil war to start.
We are taught to blame slavery on the Southern states but we learned that the Northern states were just as responsible due to their lack of action, fear of the results due to abolishment, and most importantly their double standard on the stance of slavery. Professor Nash gives us and insightful view from the eyes of free blacks and their contribution in the fight for freedom and equality of African Americans. This book has given me an insight of our history of slavery that I was unaware of, people involved and events that took place. The struggle for equality that we have in our country now is evident that it stem from our past. Using these events we can understand ourselves and continue to build a stable and free America which our forefathers based their fight for liberty and freedom from England and strengthen the words written within our Constitution that establish freedom and equality for “ALL
In the early years of the republic, there were various controversial issues that divided the American people. The ratification of the Constitution split people up into Federalist and Anti-Federalist groups, which were those who wanted the Constitution to be ratified, and those that didn’t. Before the Louisiana Purchase, people were also split on whether or not the purchase was going to be worth it in the long run. When the issue of expansion of slavery into the territories was brought up, Southern-extremest and Northern-soilers could never seem to come to an agreement. Before the Constitution, there were the Articles of Confederation.
Douglas developed his own doctrine of letting the people decide the question of slavery. He ridiculed Lincoln about his idea of state uniformity rather than domestic institutions and accused him of promoting a war of sectionalism. He also mocked “black Republicans” who he accused of demanding racial equality. Overall, he believed in the Southern interest, but supported popular sovereignty and ultimately alienated Southern voters. On the other hand Lincoln shared some Southern attitudes towards slaves as he agreed with the Dred Scott decision that slaves could not be citizens and refused to support the Fugitive Slave Law as well.