Civil War: Expansion Into Western

Civil War: Expansion Into Western Territory and Its Implications on the Pro- Versus Anti-Slavery Debate

It was said early on in its history that America could not exist have enslaved and half free -- that is half made up of states where slavery was legal as an institution, and half where slavery was prohibited. Yet America, right up until the firing of the first shots at Fort Sumter, attempted to exist in such a fashion. The addition of Western States to the union further complicated the delicate political balance between Northern free states and Southern slave states in the United States Congress. The first hints of the growing problem of this balance occurred after Congress enacted the Northwest Ordinance of 1787. "The Ordinance provided the means by which new states would be created out of the western lands and then admitted into the Union. Governors and judges appointed by Congress would rule a territory until it contained 5,000 free male inhabitants of voting age," read the act. "Then the inhabitants would elect a territorial legislature, which would send a non-voting delegate to Congress. When the population reached 60,000, the legislature would submit a state constitution to Congress and, upon its approval, the state would enter the Union." The act made clear that the new states would be equal to the old and would have jurisdiction over slavery within their territories. But this equality meant that the balance of free and slave states in Congress would be tenuous and in a constant state of imbalance. As the United States expanded its Western territories, every conflict over the slavery status of the new states stimulated yet another economic, political, and social debate between North and South. ("Northwest Ordinance of 1787," 2005)

Later, the Southern region of the United States was added to after the Louisiana Purchase, "a treaty signed on Apr. 30, 1803, the United States purchased from France the Louisiana Territory, more than 2 million sq km (800,000 sq mi) of land extending from the Mississippi River to the Rocky Mountains. The price was 60 million francs, about $15 million; $11,250,000 was to be paid directly, with the balance to be covered by the assumption by the United States of French debts to American citizens." ("The Louisiana Purchase," 2005) This only increased the anxiety in the North about the nation becoming an entirely enslaved nation, as the South gained power in the federal arms of governance.

One political solution to this concern was the doctrine of popular sovereignty. Popular sovereignty was the political doctrine that provided for the settlers of federal territorial lands to decide the status, whether free or slave, under which they would join the Union. It attempted to preserve the union, and was as the founding philosophy of the 1850 Compromise. According to the compromise, Texas would relinquish its land in dispute with Mexico and in compensation, be given 10 million dollars, money it would use to pay off its debt to Mexico. Also, the territories of New Mexico, Nevada, Arizona, and Utah would be organized without mention of slavery. The territories' inhabitants would make their state's decision about slavery later, when the states applied for statehood. ("The Compromise of 1850," PBS Website, 2004)

Regarding the nation's capital, according to the compromise the slave trade would be abolished in the District of Columbia, although slavery would still be permitted. Finally, California would be admitted as a free state. To pacify slave-state politicians, who would have objected to the political imbalance created by adding another free state, the Fugitive Slave Act was passed. Thus, the various doctrines Compromise of 1850 accomplished what it set out to do, to keep the slave/free nation united, but the solution was only temporary and ultimately, cosmetic. ("The Compromise of 1850," PBS Website, 2004)

Popular sovereignty was first invoked in the Compromise of 1850. It was invoked later in the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854. Unlike the Compromise of 1850, the implications of this act proved tragic. The tragic events in "

Bleeding Kansas" exposed the doctrine's shortcomings. Most blacks and abolitionists had strongly opposed the 1850 Compromise, while the majority of Americans embraced the first compromise believing that it offered a final, workable solution to the slavery question. But the status of Kansas became a point of violent conflict. In an era that would come to be known as "Bleeding Kansas," the territory became a battleground over the slavery question. "Most settlers who had come to Kansas from the North and the South only wanted to homestead in peace. They were not interested in the conflict over slavery, but they found themselves in the midst of a battleground. Violence erupted throughout the Kansas territory between pro and anti-slavery activists, resulting in a death toll of staggering numbers. Several attempts were made to draft a constitution that Kansas could use to apply for statehood. Some versions were proslavery, others free state. Finally, a fourth convention met at Wyandotte in July 1859, and adopted a free state constitution. Kansas applied for admittance to the Union. However, the proslavery forces in the Senate strongly opposed its free state status, and stalled its admission. Only in 1861, after the Confederate states seceded, did the constitution gain approval and Kansas become a state. ("Bleeding Kansas," PBS Website, 2004)

The Fugitive Slave Act, another part of the 1850 compromise also proved less than satisfactory in clarifying issues about the legal implications of Western expansion and its relationship with the slavery question. The act's full implications came under consideration of the U.S. Supreme Court when Dred Scott, a slave, who had been purchased by army surgeon John Emerson, a citizen of Missouri, spent time in Illinois and the Wisconsin Territory, where slavery was prohibited. "After Emerson's death in 1846, Scott sued for his freedom, claiming that his journey to free soil had made him free." ("Dred Scott," 2004) the case reached the Supreme Court where a decision was reached in 1857, which found that the man was still the property of his master's heirs, because his 'time' spent in free territory did not 'cancel out' his status as a slave.

Even after Civil War, Blacks did not enjoy equal rights in both spheres of the union. The failed policies of Reconstruction ended in the election of 1876, an election that ensured that America would remained divided between North and South in its legal policies. By 1876, the country as a whole was "growing weary of Reconstruction policies, which kept federal troops stationed in several southern states." ("Elections," Answers.com, 2004) the Grant administration had also become tainted by numerous scandals. In 1874 the House of Representatives had gone Democratic. The Democratic Samuel Tilden won the popular vote of the Presidential election, "but the Republicans needed all 20 contested electoral votes. Nineteen of them came from South Carolina, Louisiana, and Florida -- states that the Republicans still controlled." ("Elections," Answers.com, 2004)