<p>We could discuss the events leading up to the Civil War as a consecutive series of compromises that failed to find a solution to the core of the problem and left enough tension and distrust to lead for secession.</p>
<ul>
<li>Three-Fifths Compromise: compromise during the drafting of the Constitution that the slave population of each State would be counted as three-fifths for the purposes of taxation and representation in the House of Representatives.</li>
<li>Missouri Compromise of 1820: admitted Missouri as a slave State; to maintain the balance in Congress, Maine was broken up from Massachusetts and admitted as a free State; expansion of slavery would not be allowed in the territories from the Louisiana Purchase North of the 36º30’ parallel.</li>
<li>Tariff of 1828 and Nullification Crisis: there was much Southern opposition to the so-called Tariff of Abominations because of the increase in consumer prices that it brought about. South Carolina attempted to nullify both the Tariff of 1828 and 1832, leading to the Nullification Crisis: can a State have the power to nullify Federal law? John C. Calhoun, Vice-President under Jackson, supported the concept of nullification. Andrew Jackson, obviously, stridently opposed it. In this States’ Rights vs. Federal Power conflict, Jackson threatened to use military force against South Carolina, and SC legislature reconvened and withdrew its Ordinance of Nullification.</li>
</ul>
<p>Everything was calm for a while until… the Mexican-American War and the massive territories that the US acquired!</p>
<ul>
<li>Wilmot Proviso: a legislative attempt to prohibit the expansion of slavery into territories acquired from Mexico. Angered the South, and representative of Northern continued concern with slavery, and </li>
</ul>
<p>Then the big one:
- COMPROMISE OF 1850: A massive attempt by Henry Clay and Stephen Douglas to resolve the conflicting issues and preserve the Union. It 1) admitted California as a free state, 2) left the issue of slavery unaddressed in the Territory of New Mexico, 3) gave Texas financial compensation for relinquishing claims to New Mexico, 4) banned slave trade in D.C. and 5) enacted the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850. This last piece of legislation enraged the North, as it overruled the North’s ‘‘personal liberty’’ laws that protected slaves’ right to be tried by a jury, among other protections.
- Kansas-Nebraska Act: allowed popular sovereignty to decide the issue of slavery in Kansas and Nebraska. Significance? Two things: 1) it repealed the Missouri Compromise that stated that slavery would not expand north of the 36º30’, and 2) caused bitterness, rivalry and tension in both sides when many flocked into Kansas to vote one way or another and led to violence in what was called ‘‘Bleeding Kansas.’’
- Dred Scott Decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford: declared that the government owned no rights to persons imported to the US as property (i.e., slaves), and declared that the property of slaveowners (once again, slaves) could not be taken away, even in freed slaves. Significance? Practically allowed for the expansion of slavery to anywhere in the US. Further ****ed Northerners. So what angered the Southerners?
- John Brown’s raid on Harpers Ferry: white abolitionist led a slave revolt in Virginia in 1859. Instilled fears in the South of Northern sympathies to the slaves, and seeded anger at the North because of the perception by some of John Brown as a hero.</p>
<p>So, the final blow?
- Election of 1860: Abraham Lincoln elected on a platform that would not allow for any expansion of slavery, without racking up a single electoral college vote from the South. Followed by the secession of South Carolina, after which the rest of the Confederacy followed the suit.</p>