# data[].attributes.body
STATES' RIGHTS The concept of states' rights, which formed the foundation of any right or entitlement to secede, was well-grounded in the founding documents of the United States, although the entitlement to act upon these rights remains a contentious issue. Further complicating the question of states' rights is the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, which states that the powers that are neither delegated to the states nor prohibited from the states remain the states'. Confounding the question, however, is the fact that when states' rights created issues contradictory to the Southern states' positions, such as freed slaves in Northern states having the right to vote or to assemble, the Southern states asserted that these rights undermined the continuation of the United States as a union. SLAVERY A key issue surrounding the Southern states' right to secede surrounds the existence of slavery. In the South, a series of perceptions surrounding slave ownership contributed to its importance as a defining principle. These perceptions included first the idea that slave ownership represented class aspiration. Second, slave ownership reinforced the idea of white supremacy prevalent throughout the South. And third, the existence of slavery created economic benefits and opportunities that generated profits for Southern slaveholders. The significance of slavery is no more evident than in the words of William Preston, spoken when the South Carolina delegates walked out of the Democratic National Convention in Charleston: "Slavery is our King! Slavery is our Truth! Slavery is our Divine Right!" THE LAW TODAY The question of a state's legal right to secede was addressed in the 1869 Supreme Court decision of Texas v. White. In that decision, the Supreme Court stated that beginning with the Articles of Confederation the agreement between the states to form a union was to "be perpetual." The court went so far as to state that when the states agreed to "form a more perfect Union" there was nothing that more clearly asserted the belief in their indissoluble unity. The significance of this decision was reinforced by Justice Antonin Scalia, who in 2006 wrote that if there was any single right decided by the Civil War it was that there is no right for a state to secede from the union. This position, asserted by the founding documents of the United States, remains the position the United States and its Supreme Court maintain to this day.

# data[].attributes.body
In 1860-1861, eleven American states, led by the rebel Jefferson Davis, were seceding from the Union by throwing off the yoke of

"King" Abraham Lincoln. If the North had fired the first shot, some or all of these doubtful states probably would have seceded, and the South might well have succeeded.

Lincoln insisted repeatedly his paramount purpose was to save the Union at all costs.

Compromise of 1850:Senator Henry Clay introduced a series of resolutions on January 29, 1850, in an attempt to seek a compromise and avert a crisis between North and South. As part of the Compromise of 1850, the Fugitive Slave Act was amended and the slave trade in Washington, D.C., was abolished.

At first, Clay introduced an omnibus bill covering these measures. Calhoun attacked the plan and demanded that the North cease its attempts to limit slavery. By backing Clay in a speech delivered on March 7, Webster antagonized his onetime abolitionist supporters. Senator William H. Seward of New York opposed compromise and earned an undeserved reputation for radicalism by claiming that a “higher law” than the Constitution required the checking of slavery. President Zachary Taylor opposed the compromise, but his death on July 9 made procompromise vice president Millard Fillmore of New York president. Nevertheless, the Senate defeated the omnibus bill. Senator Stephen A. Douglas of Illinois then split the omnibus proposal into individual bills so that congressmen could abstain or vote on each, depending on their interests. They all passed, and Fillmore signed them. The compromise enabled Congress to avoid sectional and slavery issues for several years.

# data[].attributes.body
Europe's ruling classes were openly sympathetic to the Confederate cause. pg 443. - The South would try to enlist European help since they also depended on cotton.

--The Northern states were bound together by improved transportation and a high rate of economic growth based on both commercial farming and industrial innovation

Manufacturing expanding rapidly

Industry producing a wide range of goods and consumer products

Larger majority of northerners involved in agriculture (commercial farming)

Majority of agriculture done in the Northwest (Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota)

Large grain crops of corn and wheat were very profitable

Used newly invented steel plows and mechanical reapers which meant farms were more efficient and they could plant on more land at one time

Only needed a few supplemental workers during the harvest

Very large population to fill the jobs of the expanding North

High birthrate

Immigration of Irish and German people

--> Agriculture was the foundation of the Southern economy

Tobacco, rice, and sugar cane were lucrative cash crops

Chief economic activity was the production and sale of cotton (called King Cotton)

Primarily grown in South Carolina and Georgia

When the industry began to expand, manufacturing moved into Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas

Cotton was 2/3 of all US exports in the 1850’s

Small factories only producing 15 percent of the countries goods

Southern wealth defined by the amount of land and slaves owned and as Southern economy expanded, so did slavery

1800-1 million slaves

1860-4 million slaves

Slaves were 75 percent of the South’s population

# data[].attributes.body
Fighting on their own soil fro self-determination and preservation of their way of life, Southerners at first enjoyed an advantage in morale as well. pg

If the North had fired the first shot, some or all of these doubtful states probably would have seceded, and the South might well have succeeded.

AS one immense farm, the South seemed to be handicapped by the scarcity of factories.

Lincoln thus became president not of the United States of America, but of the dis-United States of America. pg 434

The North was not only a huge farm but a sprawling factory as well. pg 439

# data[].attributes.body
- Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland, Delaware, and West Virginia.

# data[].attributes.body
No slavery in the U.S. territories (California, Utah, New Mexico)

Congress divided:

North:

Supported Wilmot Proviso

Feared that adding slave territories would give slave states more members in Congress and deny economic opportunities to free workers

South:

Opposed Wilmot Proviso

Feared that additions of new free states to the Union would give more power to the North

# data[].attributes.body
Although the Civil War officially commenced during 1861, it was the result of many pre-existing issues between the North and the South; similarly, the difference in opinion towards the use of slaves, the economic dependency on King Cotton, and the inevitable struggle over political prowess lead to the fundamental need for the Civil War.