Sectionalism, Popular Sovereignty,
and Secession
The Missouri Compromise of 1820
The Missouri Compromise was passed because a battle was brewing in Congress over Missouri becoming a new state. Missouri wanted to enter the Union (United States) as a slave state, but Missouri was too far north to be considered a “Southern state.” So Congress came up with a plan. The plan was to allow Missouri to become a state and keep its slaves and Maine would become a state and have no slaves. With both becoming states at nearly the same time and one having slaves and the other none, it maintained the balance in Congress between free and slave states. The other part of the Compromise was that a line would be drawn from Missouri to the Pacific Ocean. Any state wanting to enter the Union south of this line had to be a slave state, and any state entering the Union north of this line would have to be a free state. This compromise worked perfectly until 1849 and was a law until 1857.
The Compromise of 1850
The Compromise of 1850 was passed because California wanted to enter the Union after the Mexican War as a free state, but the line from the Missouri Compromise cut the state in half. The Southern states did not want California (a very large state) to enter the Union as a free state without another state entering the Union as a slave state. The compromise that was worked out started the slide toward sectionalism and secession. The Compromise of 1850 had five different parts:
1. California would enter the Union as a free state.
2. Utah and New Mexico Territories would have the right to decide whether they would enter the Union as slave or free states. This became known as popular sovereignty.
3. Texas would lose land to New Mexico Territory but would get $10 million to pay
off a debt with Mexico.
4. The slave trade would end in Washington D.C. This only ended the sale and
trading of slaves, not the ownership of slaves.
5. The Fugitive Slave Law was passed. This allowed slave owners to hunt down runaway slaves and return them to the plantations. This essentially ended the North as a haven for runaway slaves, because slave owners could come after them anywhere in the United States.
This Compromise divides or sectionalizes the North and South a little more. California and Texas were minor issues. Sectionalism grows mainly because of the Fugitive Slave Law and somewhat because of the institution of popular sovereignty in Utah and New Mexico Territories.
The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854
The Kansas-Nebraska Act was passed because people were starting to move west of Missouri into unorganized territories. Congress decided to pass the Kansas-Nebraska Act to help organize the territory into two different states. The policy of popular sovereignty was extended to the territory even though it was in conflict with the Missouri Compromise, (remember the line the Missouri Compromise drew across the nation that did not allow slavery above the line). Congress thought that under popular sovereignty Nebraska would enter the Union as a free state and Kansas would enter the Union as a slave state. This would maintain the balance in Congress between slave and free states. The problem was that anyone could emigrate to Kansas, and some Northerners organized mass migrations of antislavery people to go to Kansas Territory. Many people from the South and Missouri came to Kansas to vote for Kansas to be a slave slave. The battle for Kansas caught the attention of the entire nation and caused the divide between the North and the South, known as sectionalism, to grow. The two sides fought many battles and many people died, while the nation watched and waited. The conflict that took place became known as “Bleeding Kansas.”
Dred Scott v. Sanford Supreme Court Decision of 1857
The Supreme Court Decision of 1857, about a man named Dred Scott, does not seem to fit with the items already discussed. The fact is the Dred Scott decision was the last straw for many people, and if you look at the date it’s not far from the start of the Civil War. Dred Scott was a slave who traveled with his owner to many places including the Minnesota Territory. They lived there for several years. Dred Scott decided to sue for his freedom under the premise that because he had lived in Minnesota Territory (north of the line set up by the Missouri Compromise) he should be free. A lower court agreed with Scott, but on appeal to the Supreme Court the decision was reversed. The chief justice of the Supreme Court wrote the decision for the court. In that decision Chief Justice Taney wrote that not only could Scott not get his freedom but also he and every other black person were considered property and had no rights anywhere in the United States. Also, Taney declared the Missouri Compromise unconstitutional (meaning it was against the Constitution and the law). Basically the Supreme Court said that slavery could legally exist anywhere in the United States no matter what a state government said because slaves were considered property and property can be taken anywhere. This decision made sectionalism grow even more between the North and South.
The Election of 1860
Another major break between the North and South came in 1860 when Abraham Lincoln was elected president of the United States without winning the votes of a single Southern state. Almost immediately, South Carolina seceded from the Union, thus beginning the final steps toward civil war.
Source: http://campbellms.typepad.com/files/sectionalism.doc
Web site to visit: http://campbellms.typepad.com
Author of the text: indicated on the source document of the above text
If you are the author of the text above and you not agree to share your knowledge for teaching, research, scholarship (for fair use as indicated in the United States copyrigh low) please send us an e-mail and we will remove your text quickly. Fair use is a limitation and exception to the exclusive right granted by copyright law to the author of a creative work. In United States copyright law, fair use is a doctrine that permits limited use of copyrighted material without acquiring permission from the rights holders. Examples of fair use include commentary, search engines, criticism, news reporting, research, teaching, library archiving and scholarship. It provides for the legal, unlicensed citation or incorporation of copyrighted material in another author's work under a four-factor balancing test. (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use)
The information of medicine and health contained in the site are of a general nature and purpose which is purely informative and for this reason may not replace in any case, the council of a doctor or a qualified entity legally to the profession.
The texts are the property of their respective authors and we thank them for giving us the opportunity to share for free to students, teachers and users of the Web their texts will used only for illustrative educational and scientific purposes only.
All the information in our site are given for nonprofit educational purposes