Ethical Issues Of The Civil War
The Civil War in 1861 was the outcome of built up tension due to segregation in the Northern and Southern regions of the United States. From 1789 to 1860, the conflict of slavery gained attention of whether or not the act was ethical. Although many argue the Civil War was caused by infringement on the states’ rights, it was mainly because of incongruence in the actions of the Legislative, Judicial, and Executive branches on slavery that led to the Civil War.
Legislative Branch The Louisiana Purchase in 1803 allowed for the acquisition of a large expansion of land. In 1818, Missouri held an interest in becoming a slave state, but Northern members of congress resisted, as they disliked the expansion of slavery into the land of the Louisiana …show more content…
In his speech, Lincoln addresses Stephen’s Douglas’ infringement of the Missouri Compromise by his enactment of the Kansas-Nebraska Act. During the Mexican American War, members of Congress constantly discussed how the acquisition of lands would be handled in regards to slavery. Whether a state would be free or slave was up to congress. David Wilmot, a member of the House of Representatives, stated that if any new land was acquired from the turn out of the war, slavery should be illegal in that area. This idea was known as the ‘Wilmot Proviso’, in which many members of the House happily agreed. Lincoln states in his speech that to support the Wilmot Proviso “...is the refusal to extend the Missouri line over the country acquired from Mexico.” The North didn’t want the expansion of slavery to spread across the rest of the country. The Senate, however, always disagreed with Wilmot Proviso and once the war was won and the United States gained land in the West, Wilmot Proviso was immediately struck down. With the Missouri Compromise, the newly acquired land in the West that was South of the division line would be legalize slavery. As he gained more popularity, Lincoln sought it best to argue against Douglas’ actions, as he believed it was wrong to have slavery legal in the states of Kansas and Nebraska, since it was above the Missouri line. This speech caused many in the North to start to take interest of Lincoln and his political views, later leading to his election. As Lincoln addressed this issue, Northerners became even more aggravated and angry over the controversial action of Stephen Douglas, causing even more distrust between the North and the
Legislative Branch The Louisiana Purchase in 1803 allowed for the acquisition of a large expansion of land. In 1818, Missouri held an interest in becoming a slave state, but Northern members of congress resisted, as they disliked the expansion of slavery into the land of the Louisiana …show more content…
In his speech, Lincoln addresses Stephen’s Douglas’ infringement of the Missouri Compromise by his enactment of the Kansas-Nebraska Act. During the Mexican American War, members of Congress constantly discussed how the acquisition of lands would be handled in regards to slavery. Whether a state would be free or slave was up to congress. David Wilmot, a member of the House of Representatives, stated that if any new land was acquired from the turn out of the war, slavery should be illegal in that area. This idea was known as the ‘Wilmot Proviso’, in which many members of the House happily agreed. Lincoln states in his speech that to support the Wilmot Proviso “...is the refusal to extend the Missouri line over the country acquired from Mexico.” The North didn’t want the expansion of slavery to spread across the rest of the country. The Senate, however, always disagreed with Wilmot Proviso and once the war was won and the United States gained land in the West, Wilmot Proviso was immediately struck down. With the Missouri Compromise, the newly acquired land in the West that was South of the division line would be legalize slavery. As he gained more popularity, Lincoln sought it best to argue against Douglas’ actions, as he believed it was wrong to have slavery legal in the states of Kansas and Nebraska, since it was above the Missouri line. This speech caused many in the North to start to take interest of Lincoln and his political views, later leading to his election. As Lincoln addressed this issue, Northerners became even more aggravated and angry over the controversial action of Stephen Douglas, causing even more distrust between the North and the