Chapter 10: 1848-1860

1. Sectional Conflict Intensifies Chapter 10: 1848-1860

2. How did the outcome of the War with Mexico impact the slavery issue? President Polk sidesteps the issue, thinking that slavery wouldn’t be popular or profitable Heated debates over the issue in Congress convince him that the slavery question ”cannot fail to destroy the Democratic Party, if it dose not ultimately threaten the Union itself.” Section 1: Slavery & Western Expansion

3. Added as an amendment to an appropriations bill for funding the war with Mexico • Proposed that in any territory gained from Mexico “neither slavery nor involuntary servitude shall ever exist.” • About David Wilmot, D-PA • Northern Democrat • Thought the president was too “pro-Southern” • Had supported a new tariff popular in the South but not in the North • Thought Polk had compromised too much with the British on Oregon and that slavery would almost certainly be banned there but then allowed in the land gained from Mexico The Wilmot Proviso

4. Southerners HATE it…targets Mexican territory but really threatens slavery everywhere Passes the House anyway due to a coalition of support between Northern Democrats and Whigs Doesn’t make it to a vote in the Senate Arguments put forth against the Proviso are written by John C. Calhoun and known as the Calhoun Resolution but never make it to a vote either Main argument suggests that the new territory would be owned by the states in common, so Congress has no right to ban slavery. Calhoun warns that the North needs to take the South’s concerns seriously: “political revolution, anarchy and civil war” will erupt otherwise Wilmot Proviso continued

5. Can a solution be found that will keep Congress from being consumed by the slavery question? • Senator Lewis Cass, MI, proposes that the new territories decide on slavery via popular sovereignty • Focusing on the issue this way weakens its prominence in national politics and takes some of the burden off Congress • Is a democratic process since the decision is being made by the people themselves, not Congress • Abolitionists aren’t persuaded because it overlooks the human rights issues • Popular among Northerners because they thought settlers moving from the Northern states would vote to keep slavery out of the new territories. How to lessen the sectional tensions in congress?

6. Who are the candidates? • Zachary Taylor is the Whig party candidate • Why did the Whig party form again? • Party is split into two factions: the Conscience Whigs and the Cotton Whigs • Democrats nominate Lewis Cass, NOT Martin Van Buren Free-Soil Party emerges as a coalition between the Conscience Whigs who don’t like Taylor’s stance on slavery and the antislavery Democrats who wanted Van Buren plus the abolitionist Liberty party Election of 1848

7. Opposed slavery in the “free soil” of the new territories Many Free Soilers were abolitionists BUT some really just wanted to preserve the land for white farmers and by stopping the spread of slavery, it would be easier for free men to find work (don’t have to compete for jobs or land) “Free soil, free speech, free labor and free men” Free Soil party’s platform

8. Three candidates representing three parties: • Lewis Cass • Democrat • Popular sovereignty • Would veto the Wilmot Proviso • Martin Van Buren • Free Soil Candidate • Backed the Wilmot Proviso • Opposed the expansion of slavery in the territories • Zachary Taylor • Whig candidate • Didn’t emphasize slavery or whether or not it should be allowed in the new territories Election of 1848

9. But remember that the votes were split three ways You win if you win in the electoral college and Taylor won in New York Ohio’s vote was split among the Whigs, so no clear winner there Taylor wins!

10. Immediately has to deal with California’s petition for statehood. Gold had been discovered in 1848 and the ‘49ers had increased the population by 80,000 so the territory now has enough people to become a state Settlers there wanted to be a state to help provide law and order to the territory Taylor wants to avoid a fight in Congress, so he encourages California leaders to include that California will be a free state in its petition for statehood. Taylor takes office

11. Taylor doesn’t think slavery needs to spread to continue Key issue is that if CA is admitted as a free state, the balance of power will be upset and there will be a minority of slave states vs. free states in Congress. Southern congressmen fear a loss of power because this will lead to increased focus on abolitionism in national politics and weaken the states’ rights cause Debate over slavery in california

12. Some Southern congressmen openly start discussing secession Leadership on the issue is headed by Henry Clay of Kentucky. Known as the “Great Compromiser” Remember his role in the Missouri Compromise and his work during the nullification crisis Proposes 8 resolutions Secession?

13. Grouped in pairs as a political strategy to appease both sides: A) California admitted as a free state but B) slavery not allowed elsewhere in the territory gained from Mexico A) New Mexico gets the boundary it wants with Texas but the federal government takes over Texas’ debts (many of the bondholders were Southern) A) The slave trade was made illegal in Washington, D.C. B) But NOT slavery itself A) Congress would be prohibited from interfering with the domestic slave trade B) Congress would pass the Fugitive Slave Act Clay’s proposed resolutions

14. Clay vs. Calhoun • Senator John C. Calhoun was very ill, but still the key political figure for the states’ rights position. Any compromise is going to need his blessing. • Calhoun’s assessment of Clay’s proposals was that it wouldn’t saves the Union and that Northern interference with slavery was a threat to the South itself. Indicates that the South wants three things: • An acceptance of states’ rights • The return of fugitive slaves • Guaranteed balance of power between North/South & slave/free states in Congress. • Otherwise, the only “honorable solution” for the South will be secession. Showdown in the senate

15. Daniel Webster of Massachusetts delivers the response to Calhoun’s secession talk. • Webster makes the case that the Senate needs to put national unity before loyalty to region • Supports Clay’s plan • Sees it as the only way to keep the Union together: • “ There can be no such things as a peaceable secession. Peaceable secession is an utter impossibility.” See p. 324 Response to calhoun

16. What does the president think? President Taylor opposes Clay’s proposal, but he dies. (Cholera? Gastroenteritis?) VP Millard Fillore is sworn in and he supports the compromise. Then Calhoun dies and Daniel Webster becomes Fillmore’s Secretary of State. Stephen Douglas (IL) takes over as the key leader in the Senate and he switches tactics, dividing the compromise up into separate bills. This way, Senators can vote for the parts they like and oppose the other parts. Over the summer, all parts of Clay’s plan were passed and President Fillmore signs them into law. The Compromise of 1850 has become law and is (temporarily) a solution to the tensions over North/South, slave/free. Compromise of 1850