Beyond North and South

How did the West provoke a struggle between North and South that would transform a Union of states, a coalition of sections into the modern American nation?

What impact would this struggle and transformation have on the trans-Mississippi West?

“I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with slavery in the States where it exists.”

I. Context: The Slavery Debate EvolvesII. The Wilmot ProvisoIII. California and the 1850 CompromiseIV. Railroads, Indian Territory, and Kansas-

NebraskaV. Bleeding KansasVI. The West and the War

Constitution compromises on slaveryCongress could not ban slave trade until 20

years laterfugitives3/5

Madison: "It seems now to be pretty well understood that the real difference of interests lies not between the large and small but between the northern and southern states. The institution of slavery and its consequences form the line of discrimination."

Late 1700s: Many southerners, including Jefferson, expected slavery to die out

Cotton gin, factory system, upland strain revive institution; Purchase of Florida, Louisiana and removal of “Five Civilized Tribes” spurs expansion

Yet North outpaced South by 1850—population growth 20% higher in ‘40s, 3x more moved from S to N than vice versa, 7/8 of foreign immigrants to N, 74% of RR miles—and northern capital controlled staple-crop economy

Northern states ban slavery in Northwest Ordinance, eliminate slavery in ensuing decades; other forms of unfree labor increasingly replaced by wage labor

Second Great Awakening provokes upsurge of abolitionism in North

Development of Victorian family ideal sharpened critique of slavery’s sins

Anti-slavery positions often explicitly or implicitly racist

In 1810s-1840s, many moderates favored “diffusionist position”—expansion would dilute slave system and prevent it from adopting pernicious dimensions

Other white Americans considered emigration the best solution—preferably back to Africa

Compromises repeatedly saved Union—especially Missouri Compromise of 1820

From “necessary evil” to “positive good”— by 1830 southerners argued that peculiar institution “a great moral, social, and political blessing” to slave and master alike

Mexican War upset delicate balance

• Land “naturally” ill-suited to slavery

• Land “naturally” ill-suited to slavery BUT• Both sections viewed West as crucial to growth, preservation• South had supplied majority of troops for war• Cotton already being grown in NM• Spanish had introduced slavery to work gold and silver mines

of New World—thus no contradiction• Making Southwest slave territory would “secure to the South

the balance of power in the Confederacy, and, for all coming time . . . give to her the control in the operations of the government.”—Milledgeville Federal Union, Nov. 10, 1846

• If free, North would gain Senate majority and abolish slavery• Bans against slavery offended southern honor—implied that

core institution of southern life was immoral, un-American—”a degrading inequality”

• Van Buren Democrats opposed extension of slavery, upset with Polk and Southern Dems. over veto of internal improvements, resolution of Oregon dispute, and tariff reductions

• Wilmot places amendment banning slavery in all territories acquired in war on appropriation bill for peace negotiations

• Wilmot in debate: “I have no squeamish sensitiveness upon the subject of slavery, nor morbid sympathy for the slave. I plead the cause of white freemen. I would preserve for free white labor a fair country, a rich inheritance, where the sons of toil, of my own race and own color, can live without disgrace which association with slavery brings upon free labor.”

• Wilmot in debate: “I have no squeamish sensitiveness upon the subject of slavery, nor morbid sympathy for the slave. I plead the cause of white freemen. I would preserve for free white labor a fair country, a rich inheritance, where the sons of toil, of my own race and own color, can live without disgrace which association with slavery brings upon free labor.”

• Passes in House; Senate defeats bill, introduces defanged substitute; together with Polk, pushes this through House

Calhoun and allies introduce “common-property doctrine”—new territories owned by states, not federal government; feds couldn’t discriminate against citizens of any state; citizens of slaveholding states could enter territories on equal terms with northerners—thus slavery followed the flag

Free soil doctrine (McPherson, 55):Free labor more efficientSlavery suppressed economic diversification,

undermined dignity of manual work, degraded white labor, increased ignorance of poor whites, led to feudalism and despotism

Slave agriculture stagnant in Chesapeake

Hoped to make California slave territory

Predicted slaves worth $1,000 would fetch $3-5,000 in California

Upwards of 600 slaves participated in California Gold Rush

Free “white” miners resented presence of non-whites—witness widespread race warsYuba River district votes

“that no slave or negro should own claims or even work in the mines”

Statehood debate: free blacks “a species of population that this country should be particularly guarded against.”

White miners also feared that slave owners could secure additional claims in slaves’ name and otherwise outcompete them

Slavery banned by 1849 constitution—Congress deadlocked on admission

Pres. Taylor advocated popular sovereignty, but statehood convention forced issue: "neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, unless for punishment of crimes, shall ever be tolerated in this State.“

• 1849-1850 session wracked with sectional conflict• Neither party had majority b/c of 13 Free Soilers• Took three weeks, 68 ballots to elect a Speaker• Robert Toombs, Ga.“I do not . . . hesitate to avow before this house and

the country, and in the presence of the living God, that if by your legislation you seek to drive us from the territories of California and New Mexico, purchased by the common blood and treasure of the whole people, and to abolish slavery in this District, thereby attempting to fix a national degradation upon half the States of this Confederacy, I am for disunion.”

Clay the architect 8 provisions, 4 for each section Fierce debate, 7 months of

negotiation ensue J. Davis—split California Seward: “Higher Law” Calhoun from deathbed said

compromise “worse than the Wilmot Proviso,” leaving South w/ but 2 choices: “submission or resistance”

Calls for amendment guaranteeing equilibrium—dual executive, each with veto power

Taylor’s sudden death and Stephen A. Douglas’s maneuvers finally enable compromise to pass

California admitted as free state, Utah and NM as territories w/ question of slavery still open, feds. to forgive Texas debt in exchange for TX claims in NM

Status of Missouri Compromise line unclearFillmore: “a final settlement”; McPherson:

“Only postponed the trauma”

• Southern response:Columbus (Ga.) Sentinel:“We have all along contended that

the admission of California would fill to overflowing the poisoned cup of degradation which the North has for years been preparing for the South. … We are for secession, open unqualified secession. Henceforth we are for war upon the government; it has existed but for our ruin and to the extent of our ability to destroy it, it shall exist no longer.”

• Mississippi Governor Quitman: “only effectual remedy” to wrong done was “peaceable secession of the aggrieved states”

• Some call for annexation of Cuba to restore balance

California strongly Democratic Senator William Gwin controlled

patronage networks, secured election for a fellow slavery supporter

Solid backers of South throughout 1850s CA supreme court declared in 1852 that

freedom clause was “inert and inoperative."

Free or not, blacks not allowed to testify in civil or criminal courts, even in own defense

California also passed strict fugitive slave act, 1852

Southern sympathies increase w/ decline of mining, rise of farming in late 1850s

Intrigues to divide state in two, with slavery in south, fixture of 1850s politics

Lincoln won state in 1860 with just 32.3% of votes

1853-’55: 4 Pacific railroad surveys sent out by Davis; favored 32nd parallel route, but surveyors showed that 35th and 41st parallel routes also feasible

Proposals for construction funds and grants failed

Gadsden Purchase, 1854—$10 million purchase of Mesilla Valley; part of plan by slavery supporter to build southern transcontinental, introduce slavery to So. Cal.

favored transcontinental from Chicago to San Francisco, opposed southern plan

Indian Territory (present-day OK, KS, and NE) unorganized b/c of southern resentment at Missouri Compromise; obstacle to railroad funding

Douglas on removal: “This policy evidently contemplated the creation of a perpetual and savage barrier to the progress of emigration, settlement and civilization in that direction.”

Needed 6 votes

Repealed Missouri Compromise

Created Kansas and Nebraska Territories

Opened both to slavery by popular sovereignty

Prompted staunch opposition—sacred compact had been violated

President Pierce made crucial difference—provided patronage as rewards

Finished off Whig PartyGave birth to G.O.P.Douglas’s move failed to

pave way for railroad bill

Lincoln: “Is not Nebraska, while a territory, a part of us? Do we not own the country? And if we surrender the control of it, do we not surrender the right of self-government? . . . The spirit of seventy-six and the spirit of Nebraska, are utter antagonisms.””—A. Lincoln, Peoria, Oct. 16, 1854

"Come on, then, gentlemen of the slave states. Since there is no escaping your challenge, we accept it in the name of freedom. We will engage in competition for the virgin soil of Kansas, and God give the victory to the side which is stronger in numbers, as it is in right." -- Senator William Seward, on the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Act, May 1854

“We are playing for a mighty stake. … The game must be played boldly. … If we win we carry slavery to the Pacific Ocean, if we fail we lose Missouri Arkansas Texas and all the territories.”

“We intend to ‘Mormonize’ the Abolitionists.” --Sen. David Atchison

"Come on, then, gentlemen of the slave states. Since there is no escaping your challenge, we accept it in the name of freedom. We will engage in competition for the virgin soil of Kansas, and God give the victory to the side which is stronger in numbers, as it is in right." -- Senator William Seward, on the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Act, May 1854

Demonstrated to northerners that slavocracy greater threat than immigrants—opposition shifts from Know-Nothing/American Party to Republicans

Popular sovereignty, once seen as solution to problem, became cause of heated conflict over Kansas

John Greenleaf Whittier, "Song of the Kansas Emigrant"

We cross the prairie as of old The fathers crossed the sea, To make the West, as they the East, The homestead of the free.

We go to rear a wall of men On Freedom's southern line, And plant beside the Cotton tree The rugged northern pine.

We're flowing from our native hills As our free rivers flow, The blessing of our mother land Is on us as we go.

We go to plant the common school On distant prairie swells, And give the Sabbaths of the wilds The music of her bells.

Upbearing, like the ark of God. The Bible in our van. We go to test the truth of God Against the fraud of man.

Dr. Charles Robinson, 1855: “Every pulsation in Kansas pulsates to the remotest artery of the body politic, and I seem to hear the millions of freemen, and the millions of bondsmen in our own land, the patriots and philanthropists of all countries, the spirits of the revolutionary heroes, and the voice of God, all saying to the people of Kansas, Do your duty.”

Heated elections become focus of violence on ground

“Border Ruffians” secure early majority; influx of free staters shifts balance

Competing legislatures led to lawlessness

Meanwhile, federal politicians present competing statehood bills

Underlying issue: land title, which Missourians blocked free-staters from obtaining

http://www.assumption.edu/ahc/1856CampaignSong1.gif

“On the subject of slavery, the North and South . . . Are not only two Peoples, but they are rival, hostile Peoples.”

Neutrality

NeutralityAllegiance to Confederacy

NeutralityAllegiance to ConfederacyDesertion of many troops following Pea

Ridge

NeutralityAllegiance to ConfederacyDesertion of many troops following Pea

RidgeCivil War superimposed on older

conflicts dating back to RemovalWatie and Confederate sympathizers versus

“Loyal” Cherokee led by captured John Ross1863 Cowskin Prairie Council: Union

Cherokees denounce Watie, disavow Confederacy, abolish slavery

NeutralityAllegiance to ConfederacyDesertion of many troops following Pea RidgeCivil War superimposed on older conflicts dating

back to Removal Watie and Confederate sympathizers versus “Loyal”

Cherokee led by captured John Ross 1863 Cowskin Prairie Council: Union Cherokees

denounce Watie, disavow Confederacy, abolish slaveryRetribution, devastation, and anarchy

1864-’5: all hell breaks loose, many old scores settled

Watie, last Confederate general to surrender, capitulates on June 23, 1865, more than two months after Lee

Chickasaws and Caddos did not surrender until July 14, 1865

3,503 Indians from Indian Territory fought for union; 1,018 died—highest casualty rate of all states and regions

Out of “Five Civilized Tribes”’s population of 60,000, 5-10,000 dead

Economies in ruins“To the victors, the spoils”—and what for

the losers?

1) Western gold$46 million in 1864, leading Grant

to declare, “I do not know what we would do in this great national emergency were it not for the gold sent from California.”

2) Free Soil PoliciesPacific Railroad Bill, Homestead

Act, Morrill Act all pass

3) Indian wars—Dakota, Sand Creek