Renewing the Sectional Struggle 1848-1854

Renewing the Sectional Struggle1848-1854 Chapter 18 A.P. US History

The Bitter Fruits of WarA. The ‘Wilmot Proviso’ & ‘Popular Sovereignty’ (cont.) • Northerners interpreted ‘popular sovereignty’ to mean slavery would be determined as soon as the first territorial legislature was assembled • In 1848, Congress adjourned without resolving the slavery issue – no plan received the support of a majority in both houses

The Bitter Fruits of WarB. The ‘Election of 1848’ • In 1848, both the ‘Whig’ and ‘Democratic’ parties had ‘free-soil’ factions – those who denounced slavery as against scripture and a sin, demanding a total prohibition of slavery in the territories • President Polk chose not to seek reelection for health reasons – Sen. Cass, a hero of the ‘War of 1812’, received the Democratic nomination instead • Zachary Taylor, a hero of the Mexican War and a slave owner, received the ‘Whig’ nomination • Both the ‘Whigs’ and ‘Democrats’ remained silent on the slavery issue – choosing to avoid controversy that might alienate voters

The Bitter Fruits of WarB. The ‘Election of 1848’ (cont.) • In the summer of 1848, the ‘free soil’ Whigs and Democrats broke from their parties to form the ‘Free Soil Party’ – nominating former president Martin Van Buren as their candidate • The ‘Free Soil Party’ succeeded in making slavery the central issue in the presidential election of 1848 – but they did not carry the vote in any state

The Bitter Fruits of WarB. The ‘Election of 1848’ (cont.) • Zachary Taylor, the ‘Whig’ candidate, won the election [163 electoral votes to 127], however the slavery issue badly weakened both of the major parties The ‘Election of 1848’

The Bitter Fruits of WarC. Debate & Compromise (cont.) • In December 1849, Congress convened to consider statehood for California and New Mexico – the capitol galleries were packed by citizens anxious to witness the ‘Great Debate’ • This Congressional session proved to be one of the bitterest on record – made worse by Taylor’s pressuring of Congress to admit California as a ‘free state’ and admit New Mexico as soon as it applied for an ‘act of admission’ • On January 29, 1850, Henry Clay (the ‘Great Compromiser’) stepped forward with a comprehensive plan he believed would balance the interests of free and slave states

The Bitter Fruits of WarC. Debate & Compromise (cont.) • Clay’s plan called for admitting California as a free state, Texas to abandon claims to parts of New Mexico, in return for $10 million in debt compensation, and abolishing the slave trade in the District of Columbia, but not slave ownership Texas & the Disputed Area Before the Compromise of 1850

The Bitter Fruits of WarC. Debate & Compromise (cont.) • Clay’s plan also called for organizing the rest of the ‘Mexican Cession’ into the New Mexico and Utah territories without restriction on slavery [‘popular sovereignty’], and passage of a more effective ‘Fugitive Slave Law’ • Abolitionists and southern ‘fireeaters’ [secessionists] attacked Clay’s plan • Sen. John C. Calhoun of South Carolina opposed Clay’s plan – stating northern abolitionists had strained the bonds of Union and that national unity depended on equal representation in the Senate, which California’s admission would undo

The Bitter Fruits of WarC. Debate & Compromise (cont.) • Sen. Daniel Webster of Massachusetts favored the compromise - warning of possible civil war if secessionism prevailed • Webster argued that banning slavery in the western territories was unnecessary because the climate would not support plantation agriculture and slavery • This ‘Great Debate’ was the ‘twilight of the Senatorial Giants’ – it marked the last time that all three of the ‘Great Triumvirate’ lived to appear on the national scene

The Bitter Fruits of WarC. Debate & Compromise (cont.) • In September 1850, Illinois Sen. Stephen A. Douglas broke Clay’s ‘Omnibus Bill’ into separate smaller bills and steered each one through the Congress • Signed into law by President Millard Fillmore, these bills became known collectively as ‘The Compromise of 1850’

The Sectional Balance UndoneA. The ‘Fugitive Slave Act’ • The ‘Fugitive Slave Act’ ignited an explosive chain reaction in the North – its harsh provisions drove passive moderates into the arms of abolitionists • In the North, mobs rescued runaway slaves from slave catchers and jails, states passed ‘personal liberty laws’ denying use of local jail space to federal officials

The Sectional Balance UndoneA. The ‘Fugitive Slave Act’ (cont.) • As the Underground Railroad stepped up its operations, Southerners, furious at northern interference, insisted that the stricter ‘Fugitive Slave Act’ be enforced – that all provisions of the ‘Compromise of 1850’ be honored • Northern resistance to the ‘Fugitive Slave Act’ convinced many southerners that the fanatical ‘higher law’ creed virtually dominated northern politics

The Sectional Balance UndoneA. The ‘Fugitive Slave Act’ (cont.) • In truth, the vast majority of runaway slaves caught and claimed by federal commissioners were returned to the South Slavery After the ‘Compromise of 1850’

The Sectional Balance UndoneB. Golden California (cont.) • In January 1848, James Marshall discovered gold in the American River near ‘Sutter’s Mill’ in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada • Marshall’s discovery began the ‘California gold rush’ lasting from 1849 to 1852 – more than 250,000 ‘Forty-niners’ poured into the territory hoping to strike it rich California Gold Rush Country

The Sectional Balance UndoneB. Golden California (cont.) • By 1853, San Francisco’s urban population boomed to nearly 50,000 people – lawlessness reigned, except for frontier justice carried out by the ‘Committee of Vigilance’

The Sectional Balance UndoneC. The ‘Election of 1852’ • In 1852, ‘Democrats’ and ‘Whigs’ tried to use the national elections to heal ‘sectional’ rifts that had begun to split their parties • ‘Democrats’ nominated Franklin Pierce of New Hampshire because of his known sympathies with southerners on a number of public issues • ‘Whigs’ nominated Gen. Winfield Scott, a Virginian and hero of the Mexican War – a choice that split the party between northern antislavery ‘Whigs’ angered over his support of Clay’s ‘Compromise’, and southern ‘Whigs’ who questioned Scott’s loyalty to the ‘Compromise’

The Sectional Balance UndoneC. The ‘Election of 1852’ (cont.) • The divided ‘Whigs’ lost the 1852 election to Franklin Pierce [254 electoral votes to 42] • President Pierce, an expansionist and believer in ‘Manifest Destiny’, immediately formed a cabinet of expansionist southerners – including Jefferson Davis as Secretary of War The ‘Election of 1852’

The Sectional Balance UndoneD. The Caribbean & the ‘Gadsden Purchase’ (cont.) • News of the ‘Manifesto’ leaked to the press – angering Northern free-soilers and forcing the Pierce administration to drop its scheme to acquire Cuba • In 1853, diplomat James Gadsden negotiated the purchase from Mexico of 30,000 sq. mi. of territory south of the Gila River in present-day New Mexico and Arizona – a $10 million purchase needed for a southern transcontinental railroad route [route supported by Jefferson Davis] • The ‘Gadsden Purchase’ was dictated by geography and the need to bind the U.S. closer together economically, culturally , and politically

The Sectional Balance UndoneD. The Caribbean & the ‘Gadsden Purchase’ (cont.) • Talks in Congress over building such a railroad became a sectional contest between North and South – involving figures like Stephen A. Douglas and Jefferson Davis • In the 1850s, American ‘filibusteros’ schemed to acquire Baja California and Nicaragua - hoping to add new slave territories to the U.S. Gadsden Purchase 1853

The Sectional Balance UndoneE. The ‘Kansas-Nebraska Act’ (cont.) • Stephen A. Douglas, who owned property in Chicago, also chaired the ‘Senate Committee on Territories’ – a strong position from which to influence the future route of a trans-continental railroad • In 1830, Congress had set aside a ‘permanent’ Indian reservation between the Missouri River and the Rocky Mountains – the same area Douglas suggested be used as a route for the first transcontinental railroad • Douglas proposed naming this area ‘Nebraska’, nullifying Indian claims to the reservation, and relocating the tribes - all to make way for white settlement, wagon roads, and a transcontinental railroad west from Chicago, Illinois to Sacramento, California

The Sectional Balance UndoneE. The ‘Kansas-Nebraska Act’ (cont.) • By May 1854, Douglas successfully steered the ‘Kansas-Nebraska Act’ through Congress – its final form provided that (1) the ‘Nebraska’ territory be divided into the ‘Kansas’ territory and ‘Nebraska’ territory, (2) ‘Kansas’ would decide slavery by popular sovereignty, and (3) Nebraska would be a ‘free state’ Kansas and Nebraska Territories - 1854

The Sectional Balance UndoneE. The ‘Kansas-Nebraska Act’ (cont.) • Douglas’s ‘Kansas-Nebraska Act’ wrecked the ‘Missouri Compromise of 1820’ and the ‘Compromise of 1850’ – the first by specific repeal of the law, and the latter repealed in effect by northern public opinion • The ‘Kansas-Nebraska Act’ had other unintended consequences – (1) abolitionists and ‘free-soilers’ rapidly gained strength and challenged southern slaveholders for control of ‘Kansas’, (2) the ‘Democratic’ Party only managed to elect one more president [James Buchanan] before the ‘Civil War’ and long afterward as well, (3) it gave birth to the new ‘Republican’ Party [ex-northern ‘Whigs’, some northern ‘Democrats’, ‘Free-Soilers’, ‘Know-Nothings’, and others opposed to the ‘Kansas-Nebraska Act’]

Realignment of the Party SystemA. Parties: Old & New • The ‘Mexican-American War’ significantly weakened the ‘Whig’ Party, in part because many southern ‘Whigs’ left the party over its opposition to President Taylor’s support for admission of California as a free state • By 1856, the ‘Whig’ Party had virtually ceased to exist – leaving the ‘Democratic’ Party as the country’s only national party • Moreover, by 1854, the ‘Democratic’ Party, had also split into a northern and southern wing – the southern wing dominated the party’s platform and leadership

The Realignment of the Party SystemA. Parties: Old & New (cont.) • ‘Republicans’ believed that ‘free-labor’ and ‘slave-labor’ had spawned two incompatible civilizations – the latter ‘Slave Power’ conspiring to control the ‘Democratic’ Party, subvert liberty, expand slavery, and undermine Constitutional principles Polarization of American Politics 1848-1860

Renewing the Sectional Struggle 1848-1854