THE DIVISIVE POLITICS OF SLAVERY By: Natalie and Meagan.

13
THE DIVISIVE POLITICS OF SLAVERY By: Natalie and Meagan

Transcript of THE DIVISIVE POLITICS OF SLAVERY By: Natalie and Meagan.

Page 1: THE DIVISIVE POLITICS OF SLAVERY By: Natalie and Meagan.

THE DIVISIVE POLITICS OF SLAVERY

By: Natalie and Meagan

Page 2: THE DIVISIVE POLITICS OF SLAVERY By: Natalie and Meagan.

SLAVERY IN THE TERRITORIES:

August 8, 1846 – David WilmotAmendment to a military

appropriations bill proposing “neither slavery nor involuntary servitude shall ever exist” in any territory the U.S. may acquire as a result of war with Mexico

Wilmot Proviso: meant California, as well as territories of Utah and New Mexico, would be closed to slavery forever

Page 3: THE DIVISIVE POLITICS OF SLAVERY By: Natalie and Meagan.

THE WILMOT PROVISO: Divided Congress along regional lines

North: mad at South for not supporting internal improvements; they supported the Proviso Feared adding a slave territory would give slave states more members in Congress and deny opportunities to free laborers

South: rejected – said there were complex Const. issuesSlaves were property, which was protected by the Const.

Felt it would shift power to North permanently The House of Representatives approved however the

Senate did not

Page 4: THE DIVISIVE POLITICS OF SLAVERY By: Natalie and Meagan.

ALEXANDER H. STEPHENS PREDICTION

The North will be for Wilmot Proviso, the South will be against it, and it will eventually lead to a war.

Page 5: THE DIVISIVE POLITICS OF SLAVERY By: Natalie and Meagan.

STATEHOOD FOR CALIFORNIA:

Able to skip the territorial phase of becoming a state1849 -- Const. convention, adopted state

Const., elected governor and legislature, applied to join the UnionForbade slavery, however southerners were still hoping the MO Compromise line would apply

South saw no slavery as an attackQuestioned if they should stay in Union?

Page 6: THE DIVISIVE POLITICS OF SLAVERY By: Natalie and Meagan.

THE SENATE DEBATES:

December 1849 – 31st Congress openedTop of agenda: California as a state?Second: border dispute in which slave

state Texas, claimed the eastern half of New Mexico Territory where the issue of slavery wasn’t yet decided

North was demanding abolition of slavery in D.C.

South accused North of not following the Fugitive Slave Act of 1793 South threatened secession

Page 7: THE DIVISIVE POLITICS OF SLAVERY By: Natalie and Meagan.

CLAY’S COMPROMISE: January 21, 1850 – Clay visited

rival Daniel WebsterMade a series of resolutions later

called Compromise of 1850Hoped to settle slave controversy

Clay felt the only choice was to accept the Compromise and if it wasn’t the only choice left was disunion which would surely lead to war.

Page 8: THE DIVISIVE POLITICS OF SLAVERY By: Natalie and Meagan.

TERMS OF THE COMPROMISE:

To appease the North and South:California added as a free

state (North)New and more effective

fugitive slave law (South) Some applied to all

people:Popular sovereignty: right

of residence in an area to vote for or against slavery

Pay Texas $10 million to surrender land in New Mexico

Page 9: THE DIVISIVE POLITICS OF SLAVERY By: Natalie and Meagan.

CALHOUN AND WEBSTER RESPOND:

Clay’s speech marked start of great political debateClay presented South’s case for slavery in

1 month Daniel Webster spoke next

urged North to stricter fugitive slave law South to think more cautiously about danger of secession

Page 10: THE DIVISIVE POLITICS OF SLAVERY By: Natalie and Meagan.

WEBSTER’S RESPONSE TO THE COMPROMISE

Daniel Webster wasn’t afraid to voice his opinion on the idea of the south’s idea of secession. He felt that secession would only lead to war.

Page 11: THE DIVISIVE POLITICS OF SLAVERY By: Natalie and Meagan.

THE COMPROMISE IS ADOPTED:

Senate rejected compromise in JulyDiscouraged Clay left Washington and

Stephen A. Douglas continued the work compromise into individual laws so Congress

could vote on each Taylor died leaving Millard Fillmore as

presidentSupported the compromise South was willing to negotiate

(best choice available) Viewed as “first settlement”

between slavery and sectional differences

Page 12: THE DIVISIVE POLITICS OF SLAVERY By: Natalie and Meagan.

VIDEO:

Page 13: THE DIVISIVE POLITICS OF SLAVERY By: Natalie and Meagan.

WORKS CITED: Kash. “The Missouri Compromise of 1850.” Mr. Kash’s History Page. Web. 17

Oct. 2011. <http://mrkash.com/activities/compromise.html>. U.S. Coin Values. “The 1850s: Coin Availability Improves as Nation Drifts

Toward Civel War.” Rare Coin Values and Proven Trends: Smart Strategy for Buying Collectible Coins. U.S. Coin Values. Web. 17 Oct, 2011. <http:// www.us-coin-values-advisor.com/the-nation-drifts-toward-war.html>.

“US History 1 throught he Civil War Class 11.” Paul Roebuck: Archaeology, Geography, Ethiscs Hitory, Social Theory. U.S. History. Web. 18 Oct.

2011. <http://www.roebuckclasses.com/201/classdocs/lecturenotesch14.htm>.

Wikipedia. “Stephen A. Douglas.” Wikipedia the Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, 26 Sept. 2011. Web. 18 Oct. 2011. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/

Stephen_A._Douglas>. Keller, Bob. “Bob’s Rock Shop:Rock and Fossil Stamps of the United States.” Bob’s

Rock Shop: The First ‘Zine for Mineral Collectors and Rockhounds. Rock and Fossil Stamps of the United States. Web. 18 Oct. 2011. <http://www.rockhounds.com/rockshop/stamps/united_states/united_states_toc.html>.

Reed, Dale. “Causes of the Civil War- Popular Sovereignty and Westward Expansion- YouTube.” YouTube- Broadcast Yourself. American Civil War Volume 1. Web. 18 Oct. 2011. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQQJDR_rX30>.

Holt McDougal The Americans. Holt McDougal the Americans. U.S.A.: Y Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2012. Print. 978-0-547-49115-8.

Primary Sources