Lesson 1

Westward Expansion Slavery Constitution Economic Legacy of the past _________________ was/were the major cause of division between the North and South by c.1850

Potential factors Economic differences Agriculture vs. Industrial Free labour vs. Slavery Economic policies Slavery Economic arguments Moral arguments Westward Expansion arguments Westward Expansion Missouri Compromise Mexican War (Wilmot/Calhoun) Popular Sovereignty Constitution Slavery Federal/states power Legacy of the Past (MC/NC) Expansion of Slavery Power of Federal/States Potential factors

Essay Structure 1. Introduction 2. Main Body 3. Conclusion Context – background information to the question/what you are going to talk about. Criteria – how will you define division? Argument – what is your essay going to argue 2. Main Body FOR AGAINST 3. Conclusion Summarise your explaination on each factor you mention Come to your overall argument

Economic Differences EVIDENCE POINTS Agriculture vs. Industrial Free Labour vs. Slavery Economic Policies North wanted protective tariffs to ward off European competition whilst the South wanted free trade. This is because the North was more industrial and therefore competed against foreign manufactured goods. However the South, (more agricultural), they relied on imported goods and the ability to export their agricultural produce. (NC highlights this). The southern states produced 35% of the nations manufactured output. The North had twice as much railway. There was an argument about whether free labour or slavery was the more efficient method and which offered greater protection to the workers. The South believed that Slavery was an efficient form of organisation. Slave prices doubled, investors made returns similar to those in the North. Cotton was grown more efficiently than any other area in the world. However the North believed that Slavery was holding back the Southern economy, poor investment and capital would be better spent on manufacturing.

Slavery Economic Arguments Moral Arguments Westward Expansion POINTS EVIDENCE Economic Arguments Moral Arguments Westward Expansion The South believed that Slavery was an efficient form of organisation. Slave prices doubled, investors made returns similar to those in the North. Cotton was grown more efficiently than any other area in the world. However the North believed that Slavery was holding back the Southern economy, poor investment and capital would be better spent on manufacturing. Abolitionists in the North thought that slavery was a sin against God, and called for emancipation. However, the south argued that slavery was a positive good (history, inferior species, bible) Westward expansion highlighted how divisive the issue of slavery was. There were very different views on what should happen to slavery in areas gained in the West (Missouri, Mexican war)

Westward Expansion Missouri Compromise POINTS EVIDENCE Missouri Compromise Mexican War Popular Sovereignty Popular sovereignty was the idea that individuals would vote whether their states should have slavery or not. There was debate between the North and South about whether this vote should happen early on (North) or later on (South) Missouri Compromise threatened the balance of power in the Senate between Northern free states and Southern slave states. Eventually there was a compromise to keep the Senate balanced by creating another norther free state. Debates on what should happen to land acquired from Mexico. Wilmot Proviso suggested there should be no slavery. Voting on this proviso was sectional (almost all the North voted ‘for’ and almost all the South voted ‘against’.

Constitution POINTS EVIDENCE Slavery Westward Expansion Federal/State powers Constitution had left a tension between those who wanted a strong executive and those who wanted an emphasis on States’ rights. This tension emerged because the Constitution was not explicit in dividing power between the Federal and State governments e.g. tariffs and Nullification. Constitution was not fully clear in terms of the long term future of slavery and in particular its extension as the Union grew westwards. (MC and Mexican War) the compromises over slavery laid out in the Constitution were never likely to last and satisfy both the opponents and supporters of slavery (3/5 of a person)

Legacy of the Past Expansion of Slavery POINTS EVIDENCE Expansion of Slavery Power of Federal/State Government Missouri Compromise create the expectation that there would always be a balance of free and slave states. Whilst in the short term this resolved the problem of Missouri, this could not be sustained. Additionally the Missouri Compromise did not deal with area outside the Louisiana purchase and therefore did not solve the problem of slavery in America as a nation. The Nullification Crisis set up the expectation that stability in America relied on the Federal Government not infringing upon states rights. This was unlikely…