| Line 166: |
Line 166: |
| | *slave trade was abolished in D.C., but slavery was not | | *slave trade was abolished in D.C., but slavery was not |
| | *enacted tougher federal fugitive slave laws and strictly enforced them (Clay pushed this through the Senate) | | *enacted tougher federal fugitive slave laws and strictly enforced them (Clay pushed this through the Senate) |
| − | *Texas received $10M to pay off its debt in return for accepting a narrower western boundary and give up claims to New Mexico and others | + | *Texas received $10M to pay off its debt in return for accepting a narrower western boundary and give up claims to New Mexico and territory that became other states |
| | | | |
| | Senators Henry Clay, Daniel Webster and Stephen Douglas argued for this Compromise; South Carolina (and pro-slavery) John Calhoun was against it. | | Senators Henry Clay, Daniel Webster and Stephen Douglas argued for this Compromise; South Carolina (and pro-slavery) John Calhoun was against it. |
| Line 273: |
Line 273: |
| | ==The North and South: Strengths and Weaknesses== | | ==The North and South: Strengths and Weaknesses== |
| | | | |
| − | The South had a feeling of invincibility from its tremendous economy, which was based on high prices for “King Cotton” and other crops, such as tobacco and sugar cane. The South also felt that the North lacked a will to fight and, if it did, Britain and France would recognize and help the South due to their dependence on its exports like cotton, tobacco, rice and sugar cane. The South also had strategic advantages: controlled the mouth of the Mississippi and need only defend rather than conquer. The South considered its men in much better condition to fight. The South had better generals, and would have done far better had its generals like Stonewall Jackson not died in battle. | + | The South had a feeling of invincibility from its tremendous economy, which was based on high prices for "King Cotton" and other crops, such as tobacco and sugar cane. The South also felt that the North lacked a will to fight and, if it did, Britain and France would recognize and help the South due to their dependence on its exports like cotton, tobacco, rice and sugar cane. The South also had strategic advantages: it controlled the mouth of the Mississippi and needed only to defend rather than conquer. The South considered its men, who spent more time outdoors, to be in much better condition to fight. The South had better generals, and would have done far better had its generals like Stonewall Jackson not died in battle. |
| | | | |
| − | But the North benefited from the railroad system, heavy immigration and a much more balanced economy. Opposition to immigration, in the 1850s had arisen in the North through the American (Know-Nothing) Party, which roused popular fears about the Irish Catholics flooding into America. But the greater numbers from immigration ended up helping the North in the war. The North also had control of the United States Navy, which proved to be useful. | + | But the North benefited from the railroad system, heavy immigration and a much more balanced economy. Opposition to immigration, in the 1850s had arisen in the North through the American (Know-Nothing) Party, had roused popular fears about the Irish Catholics flooding into America. But the greater numbers from immigration ended up helping the North in the war, as large numbers of immigrants fought for the North against the South. Overall, the population of the North was 22 million compared with only 9 million in the South, 3.5 of whom were slaves whom the South were reluctant to arm. The North also had control of the United States Navy, which proved to be useful in the war. |
| | + | |
| | + | Finally, the North was successful in keeping border slave states -- Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri and the to-be-formed West Virginia -- from joining the Confederacy and fighting against the North. Abraham Lincoln said about Kentucky, "Kentucky gone, we can not hold Missouri, nor as I think, Maryland. These all against us, and the job on our hands is too large for us. We would as well consent to separation at once, including the surrender of this capitol."<ref>http://www.mrlincolnandfreedom.org/inside.asp?ID=31&subjectID=3</ref> Had those border states sided with the South, as it expected, the outcome may have been different. |
| | | | |
| | == What Else Happened in the 1850s? == | | == What Else Happened in the 1850s? == |