Two Societies at War

¶ … United States was founded upon conflict. As early as the Constitutional Convention of 1787 in Philadelphia the lines of contention were already drawn: the commercial interests of the North conflicted with the planter interests of the South. When the Constitutional Convention convened the founders of the United States sought to put into writing the philosophical basis for the nation they had recently created -- and slavery was an issue. The perpetuation of slavery was a direct contradiction to their premise that "all men are created equal," and many members of the Convention called for its abolishment. However, it was acknowledged that the Southern economy could not function without it; slavery continued, but only where it was indispensable. Yet its continuation was not necessarily ideological; it was not that Southerners were inherently more evil or cruel than Northerners -- the divide between the states possessed more practical origins.

In its essence, slavery was an efficient agricultural method best suited to a region where cotton and tobacco were the dominant crops. These crops, by contrast to corn or wheat, required a relatively large workforce. In order to generate the most profits, slavery had been employed by Southern aristocrats since the founding of the colonies. From an economic perspective, this was done to cut down on the large costs of actually employing workers. Over time, it became an institution -- the abolishment of which would spell certain doom for the established order.

Ultimately, the Northern states developed a more diverse economy, based upon free labor, while the South depended upon a handful of cash crops, based upon vast numbers of unskilled laborers. Into the nineteenth century the North developed steam power, new ways of refining steel, and expanded its industrial base into the Midwest. These regions depended upon crops like beef, wheat, and corn -- none of which were suitable for slave labor. So, as the West was settled, both the Northern and Southern economies sought to take command of contentious regions in order to further their ends.

Additionally, the North, with its abundance of goods, saw European goods as direct competition. As a result, tariffs were placed upon imported goods; to the North the tariffs merely ensured their economic survival, but to the South they were perceived as direct payments to the North. The 1824 Tariff, in particular, came to be called the "Tariff of Abominations" by the Southerners. The Southern states asserted their power in 1832 when South Carolina nullified the Tariff of 1832. Political stances regarding nullification began to clearly draw the lines between Northern and Southern politicians.

Of more pressing concern, however, was the expansion of these competing economies. Since the South needed slaves, the government made the Missouri Compromise in 1820; which made Missouri a slave state while making Main free. In this way, the issue of slavery not only divided the Northern and Southern economies, but was used as the balancing point between Northern and Southern interests in the Federal Government. These divisions were given further geographical basis when it was agreed that states south of Missouri would be slave, while those north of the border would be free.