7/28/2019 Can the United States Justify the Civil War
1/2
Can the United States Justify the Civil War
The definition of Manifest Destiny reads as: "The belief in the
1840'sin the inevitable territorial expansion of the United States,
especially as advocated by southern slaveholders who wished to
extend slavery into new territories." This explanation was
transcribed from the World Book Encyclopedia's dictionary. It is
directly evident that from this unbiased statement we can trace the
first uprising of a separate group of people yearning to break the
newly formed bond of the great United States.
Before and during the Mexican War, the people who were pushing
for the claimed land once owned by innocent native americans, were
always looking for a scapegoat. They needed one way or another, a
way to squirm out of taking the blame for the enslaved and murdered
Mexican causalities. There was one man, though, who would not let
this happen, David Wilmot. David Wilmot was a democrat
fromPennsylvania, who was willing to revise the President's bill.
In this revision, Wilmot proposed "...neither slavery nor
involuntary servitude shall ever existin any part of the
territory...". This was not well liked by the South and eventhough
it was given thumbs up many times in the senate, our newly formed
country was now bordered by fresh land. The Wilmot Proviso
underwent quite a bit of
pressure so that compromises could satisfy each side.
The Compromise of 1850 was soon to follow but the real catch of
the sameyear was the Fugitive Slave Act. This act was invented so
that the slaves of slaveowners, who took them to a slave-free state
on a vacation or something, could not escape. In this act, the
hardest part to understand, was that the courtswere to try to give
a fair trial to any runaway slaves. This enfuriated many ofthe
Northern abolitionists who now were going to expand the tracks of
the underground railroad to help extend their efforts in the rescue
of the runaways. Thepoint of no return, where many people knew for
sure that the country would be devided between the north and the
south was the ruling on the Kansas Nebraska Act. This act was
majorly contributed into by Stephen A. Douglas and probably would
never have passed without his consent. The whole idea behind the
act that rea
lly got to the south was Popular Sovereignty. This so called
"specific" rule was none to specific in stating when a territory
could decide when they were pro or anti slavverry. The
abolitionists were flooding the new territory with theirown kind
where as the southerners were just moving next door. They were
armed and ready and knew that they would have to shed blood before
the voters went to the polls.
In the year of 1860, our most prized yet controversial president
came into office, Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln had many issues to cover
in the begining ofhis term and he did not want to go aabout it in
the wrong fashion. The first thing Lincoln could have done to delay
the war if not prevent it was to let the Confederates have Fort
Sumter. But because of his stubborness, the begining of the Civil
War had started with no casualities but the rifles had been fired,
Unio
n against the Confederacy.
The north and the south had it's share of loud mouths who threw
their weight around and they were not about to stop until they had
their way. Althoughthese people were in the numbers of just a
handful, their charismatic ways received a lot of attention that
was only to feed the fire of of no compromise. Oneof the major
contributers to this action was John Brown. In the year 1859,
JohnBrown led a band of twenty two armed men into Harper's Ferry,
Virginia and wenton a slaying spree starting with the slaveowners
families and then freeing theslaves so they could join in arms with
his party. But there is another side of
7/28/2019 Can the United States Justify the Civil War
2/2
the coin and that is where Dred Scott comes in the Civil War
picture. Dred Scott was a slave who was taken to Illinois by his
master on a trip and taking notice to the Missouri Compromise, he
sued his master to be free. The case went to Supreme Court where he
was ruled against at a 7 to 2 vote. So this meant that there was no
way that he could bring the case to Federal Court and sue. There
wasquite an uproar on the decision and this made it very impossible
not to foreseethe coming of the Civil War.
When we look to the past and see that this hunk of rock now
known as theUnited States was given to us to explore our frredom of
religeon, who would ofthought that it would be taken this far.
Brothers against brothers, families torn apart because of one
little infraction, slavery. Who would have thought that700,000
people would die at the hands of their own countrymen, people that
theyfought with during the Revolutionary War so that they could be
free of the monarchy of British Rule. Now in today's perspective,
we, the United States are trying to stop that from happening in
other parts of our ever growing world.ritory...". This was not well
liked by the South and eventhough it was given thumbs upma or
something, could not escape.
