Class notes - Oct 31 2005

You need to link your issue to the constitution.

New England and the War of 1812

·        South – agricultural

·        North – Industrial

·        Problem? – How does a “differing” economy lead to war?

·        Cotton is being sent to Britain, because Britain has an industrial economy (textile mills) and needs cheap cotton.

·        England makes “shirts” from southern cotton and then sends (sells) them to the south which creates a “reciprocal” relationship.

·        Why does this irritate the North? – Because the North wants the south to by shirts and textile goods from the North.

·        BUT England shirts are cheaper because England is further along in their industrialization than the North is. 

·        War – France and England are at war, and when they fight, the US is dragged into the war, because they are fighting over the trade routes that the US is trying to use.

·        Essentially the North was funding this war on taxes, but was not directly benefiting from it. The South was because it would protect trade routes for the South. North doesn’t care about these trade routes.

·        North didn’t want top participate in this war; but the federal government wanted to establish the US as sea power.

·        US fighting to maintain control over their own ships, because the British could board these ships and take (seize) whatever they wanted because they had a stronger navy.

·        The federal government is waging this war, and according to New England the federal government is favoring the south too much. So, New England says, end the war or we will secede from the union.

·        What is the source of this problem? – If secession is directed at the federal government, then what is the problem? Secession gives power to the states over the federal government. When the constitution as ratified, were states accepting a “contract”? When do states have the ability to get out of this contract? If you believe in Locke, then you believe that you have the right to rebel if a leader is tyrannical (take away life, liberty, property). Therefore, what is the problem with the constitution?

·        Why didn’t New England secede? By the time they reached Washington the war was over.

·        Who has power the federal government or the states?

Issues of Expansion – Missouri Compromise

·        Missouri – had slaves. But was not part of the confederacy. So, when they wanted to join the union (1820), need to have equal # of slave states and non- slaves states in order to balance the votes in Congress over issues of slavery.

·        How is representation in the Senate determined? There are two from every state. If you have the same # of slave states and Free states then you will have equal number of votes, and then the Senate will not be able to make a decision about slavery. Therefore Congress will never have to talk about issues of slaver, because we will never have to decide about it; never have to talk about it; never have to fight about it.

·        If we let Missouri in a slave state, then we need to create another state… viola, Maine.

·        In 1820, everything north of the 36, 30 line is free except Missouri, and everything south of that line is a slave state.

·        Compromise of 1850 – should California be allowed in the union, and what should happen with the land that was acquired in the war with Mexico, what to do about Washington DC, and what to do about Texas, and their claim of the land north if their borders.

·        In DC, abolished the slave trade.

·        .Fugitive slave act – citizens had to help the slavery recover effort (runaway slaves had to be returned to their plantations in the south) this led to the imprisonment of free blacks. The north enabled this because the North wanted California as a free state. The north had to be complicit in the hunting down and returning of escaped slaves.

·         Harriet Jacobs – fugitive slave act – forced blacks to move to Canada.

·        How do we decide who is free and who is a runaway save leads to “Popular Sovereignty”

·        Kansas and Nebraska – wanted to establish one territory, but according to the Missouri Comp, they should both be free. But, the federal government said based on Popular Sovereignty, many slave owners moved there to influence the vote. So, both people who are pro-slavery and anti-slavery start killing each other (“Bleeding Kansas”). The vote is for slavery, but the anti-slavery advocates claim the election was rigged. Ultimately, Kansas is a free state, because they were admitted after the south seceded.

·         What were they fighting over (really)? Who gets to decide if Kansas is slave or free – state government or the federal government? Who controls who? (States rights)

Tariff of Abomination

·        The federal government taxes (35% increase) imports from Britain to the south, which then forces the South to trade with the North. Because British goods are now more expensive that Northern goods. The hope was that the South would now trade with New England.

·        1828 - South Carolina John C. Calhoun declares a federal law not valid in their state. This is known as the “nullification law”. Because the federal government is favoring one side (the North) over another. This is the same argument that New England made in during the War of 1812.

·        South Carolina John C. Calhoun - South Carolina “aint” going to pay any more. And if you make us pay will secede.

·        Jackson (as president), sent the army to South Carolina and put the state under martial law. Jackson then goes to Congress and tells them “you will help” by repealing the tax by lowering the tax to a more reasonable level.

·        Jackson then says to South Carolina – don’t do it again or else “I will hang you so high that they will see you on the moon.”

·        What did Jackson manage to do? He effectively ‘stopped’ the civil war (at this time - 1828). If he hadn’t succeeded, then we would be saying today that the civil war was fought over taxes. And, if New England had successfully seceded in 1812 then we would be saying that the civil war was fought of trade routes.

Questions and Issues Raised

The north and the south were essentially fighting over the same thing. (it was a big mess).

What was it about Abraham Lincoln that caused the South to secede? What made the South mad?
-Its more of an issue of what Lincoln did after the South seceded.

This was an inevitable situation. An issue of state "pride" which led to a "split" in the country.

J Dub - this is "nationalism" vs. "sectionalism" .