The Heritage of The South: A History of the Introduction of Slavery; Its Establishment From Colonial Times and Final Effect Upon the Politics of the United StatesEarly, Jubal Anderson
History
The Heritage of The South: A History of the Introduction of Slavery; Its Establishment From Colonial Times and Final Effect Upon the Politics of the United States
Early, Jubal Anderson
Slavery -- United States; United States -- Politics and government -- 1861-1865
Arkansas had been admitted as a slave state in the year 1836 and Michigan
as a free state in 1837; and in 1845 Florida was admitted as a slave
state, the same act providing for the admission of Iowa, which was a free
state, but did not come in until 1846.
On the 29th of December, the independent Republic of Texas was admitted
into the Union as a state, and came in with slavery already established
there. This admission, or annexation as it was called, of Texas, resulted
in the war with Mexico and the establishment, at the close of the war
in 1848, of the Rio Grande as the southern boundary of Texas and the
acquisition of the provinces or territories of New Mexico and upper
California as United States territory.
The admission of Texas gave a new impulse to the antislavery agitation,
and the acquisition, by the war, of the new territory brought it again
prominently before Congress. Even before the close of the war with
Mexico, the old proposition for the exclusion of slavery from the public
territories was revived, with a view to its application to any territory
that might be acquired as a result of the war, and it was then designated
as the "Wilmot Proviso" from the name of the member re-introducing it. On
all propositions to establish governments of the newly acquired territory,
after the close of the war, the "Wilmot Proviso" was pressed with great
vehemence by Northern politicians, and was strenuously resisted by those
of the South.
The most extreme of the Southern politicians were willing to extend the
so-called Missouri Compromise line of 36° 30´ to the Pacific ocean,
and regard it as a final settlement of the question, but the Northern
advocates of the proviso would listen to no terms for an adjustment, and
thus again repudiated the principle and spirit of the settlement made by
the Missouri bill. Southern statesmen, while willing to accept the line of
36° 30´ for the sake of peace, did not claim the right to foster slavery
even upon the territory south of that line, by the action of Congress,
but they claimed that the question should be left where the Constitution
of the United States left it, that is, that the people settling in the
territories should be allowed freedom to adopt their own institutions when
they came to form state governments, and that Congress in the meantime
should adopt no measures to forestall their action. They urged that
the territory was acquired by the common blood and treasure, and that
Congress, therefore, in its action, should not give preference to one
section over another and thus virtually exclude the people of the South
from the newly acquired domain. This was a reasonable and just view of
the subject, and did not look to the increase of the number of slaves,
but merely to their expansion over a wider area, and the older states
from the rapidly increasing slave population. Nor was the proposition to
exclude slavery ever in the interest of freedom, for it sought merely to
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account