|
|
| & etc |
FEEDBACK
(C)1998-2012
All Rights Reserved.
Site last updated
13 January, 2012
|
|
|
|
The Great Republic by the Master Historians
Events Preceding the Civil War
by Bancroft, Hubert H.
|
The remaining events of the social and political history of the period covered
by the preceding selections are too numerous to give each of them separate
treatment, in the limited space at our command. It therefore becomes necessary
to deal with them in a rapid review, as preliminary to the momentous historical
era of the Civil War. Among the most important of these events was the financial
panic of 1837, a startling result of the unbounded speculation, and the
executive experiments on the finances, of the preceding epoch. The first era of
bank-expansion in the United States was due to the abrogation of the charter of
the National Bank in 1811, and to the business activity which followed the close
of the second war with Great Britain. A second National Bank was instituted in
1817. The undue extension of banking facilities which existed during this period
was followed in 1819 by a necessary contraction. The bank circulation fell from
$110,000,000 in 1816 to $65,000,000 in 1819. Financial distress and a general
depression of industry succeeded, from which the country did not fully recover
for several years.
When Jackson became President, in 1829, he very quickly manifested an enmity to
the National Bank, which he declared to be corrupt, dangerous, and
unconstitutional. His first hostile measure was to remove from it the government
deposits, which he distributed among the State banks. This measure produced a
storm of opposition, greatly disturbed the conditions of business, and caused
general distress in the industrial community. But Jackson was unyieldingly
obstinate in his opinions, and his hostility to the bank was next displayed in a
veto of the bill to renew its charter, which would expire on March 3, 1836. The
State banks took advantage of this condition of affairs to expand greatly their
discounts, new banks came rapidly into existence, and the banking facilities
were enormously increased, the discounts augmenting from $200,000,000 in 1830 to
$525,000,000 eight years afterwards.
A series of wild speculations attended this expansion: foreign goods were
heavily imported, and enormous operations took place in government lands, in
payment for which paper money poured profusely into the treasury. Such was the
state of affairs at midsummer of 1836. To check these operations a "specie
circular" was issued by the Secretary of the Treasury, which required payment
for government lands to be made in gold and silver after August 15, 1836. The
effect of this series of executive actions, and of the fever of speculation
which existed, was disastrous. The species which was expected to flow into the
treasury in payment for public lands failed to appear. The banks refused
discount and called in their loans. Property was everywhere sacrificed, and
prices generally declined. Then, like an avalanche suddenly talling upon the
land, came the business crash and panic of 1837, which caused the financial ruin
of thousands. During the first three weeks of April two hundred and fifty
business houses failed in New York. Within two months the failures in that city
alone aggregated nearly one hundred millions of dollars. Throughout the whole
country the mercantile interests went down with a general crash, involving the
mechanic, the farmer even the humblest laborer, in the ruinous consequences of
the disaster. Bankruptcy everywhere prevailed, forced sacrifice for valuable
merchandise was the order of the day, on less than eight of the States partially
or wholly failed, even the general government could not pay its debts, trade
stood still, business confidence vanished, and ruin stalked unchecked over the
land.
The panic of 1837 was not due solely to the causes above enumerated. Many
influences converged to produce this result, and to give rise to the fever of
speculation which was its immediate predecessor. As one of its results the
banking system of the country suffered a general collapse. Out of eight hundred
and fifty banks, three hundred and forty-three closed entirely, sixty-two failed
partially ,and the system of State banks received a shock from which it never
fully recovered. The compromise tariff of 1833, though which the tariff was to
be annually reduced until it should reach a general twenty per cent. Level in
1842 added to the distress, and recovery only fairly took place after 1842 in
which year a few tariff bill was passed, imposing a thirty per cent. ad-valorem
rate on all imported goods except in certain special cases. In 1846 a low tariff
bill was again passed, which continued in force until 1860 wen in the Morrill
tariff bill was resumed the protective principle which has been ever since
maintained.
During the era in question the settlement of the broad territory of the West had
been taking place with great rapidity, the pioneer emigration, which had log
since crossed the Alleghenies and spread throughout the eastern valley of the
Mississippi, now extending widely westward of that river towards the infertile
barrier of the Rocky Mountains. The movement had even reached the Pacific,
through the incitements of the fur-trade, and of certain advantages offered by
the rich plains of California. Yet the American population of this region was
but sparse in 1848, in which year California became a part of the United States,
as a result of the Mexican War. Emigration thither now proceeded more rapidly,
while the neighboring territory of Utah became the land of refuge of the strange
sect of Mormons who had made their way thither in 1846 and founded Salt Lake
City in 1847. The settlement of the Pacific region, however, must have taken
place very slowly had it not been for the discovery of gold in the mountain
region of that territory. The cry of "Gold," that rang far and wide throughout
the land in the summer and autumn of 1848 gave rise to such a fever of
emigration as the world has seldom known. Over land and over sea thousands of
eager treasurer-seekers flocked to this new land of promise, and within one year
of American occupation the land filled up more than it had done in three
centuries of the drowsy Spanish rule.
On January 19, 1848, James W. Marshall discovered the glittering yellow
fragments, which gave rise to this furore of emigration, in a mill-race which he
was excavating for Captain Sutter, at Coloma. Investigation proved that gold
existed in great abundance throughout a broad region, and are a year had passed
thousands of fortune-seekers were already actively at work, washing treasure out
of the sands of ancient rivers, whose waters had ceased to flow ages before. The
story of the "gold rush" to California is one of extraordinary interest, and the
scenes to which it gave rise are almost without example in the annals of
mankind, except in the closely similar case of the Australian gold discovery. A
few years, however, began to exhaust the "placer," or surface, diggings of
California, and new methods of mining, requiring considerable capital, had to be
resorted to. The "hydraulic process" was invented in 1852, the "high gravels"
being broken down by the force of powerful jets of water, conducted through
pipes from mountain streams and lakes. Quartz mining also came into vogue, the
metallic veins being worked and the gold extracted by difficult and costly
processes. Rich deposits of silver were also discovered, particularly in Nevada
and Colorado. The era of individual fortune-hunting was over, but enormous
wealth still lay buried in the rocks of the region, and emigration proceeded
with unexampled rapidity, peopling the Pacific Territories in a ratio far
exceeding anything ever experienced in the settlement of the Atlantic slope.
Agriculture slowly succeeded the mining fever, the rich soil of California
proving to hold a wealth more valuable than that contained within its rocks. The
vast forests of the Pacific coast ranges also proved treasure-mines. In
consequence of these various inducements to population the Far West has, within
forty years, become the home of an extensive and flourishing population. State
after State has been added to the Union in that distant region, railroads and
telegraphs have been stretched across the continent, and in response to the
magic cry of "Gold" an immense and thickly-peopled domain has been added to the
territory of the United States of America.
There is one further phase of American history, to which our attention is
particularly called, from its momentous importance as the producing cause of the
Civil War. This is the development of Abolitionism, and the bitter controversies
to which it gave rise. The sentiment in favor of slave-manumission died away in
great measure after the passage of the Missouri Compromise Bill in 1820, and,
though it was kept feebly alive, it failed to become a question of national
importance until after the close of the Mexican War. A feeling in favor of
"gradual abolition" existed in some measure both South and North until 1830,
though no steps were taken towards its realization. The doctrine of immediate
abolition was first openly promulgated by William Lloyd Garrison, in The
Liberator, a newspaper of which the first number was issued on January 1, 1831.
Anti-slavery societies were soon after formed, but the cause which they
advocated met with great opposition in the North during the succeeding twenty
years, the meetings of the abolitionists being violently broken up, and their
lives occasionally endangered. The political strength of the abolition idea was
first made manifest in 1844, when the candidate of the so-called Liberty party
polled 62,300 votes, enough to defeat Clay and make Polk President of the United
States.
It was, however, the close of the Mexican War, and the consequent large addition
of territory to the United States, that brought the question of slavery-
extension prominently before Congress, and opened that series of hostile debates
which ended only with the Southern declaration of war. In the discussion of the
treaty with Mexico, David Wilmot of Pennsylvania proposed to add to the
appropriation bill the proviso that slavery should be prohibited in any
territory which might be acquired in consequence of the war. This "Wilmot
Proviso" was defeated in the Senate, but was received with much approbation in
the North. The opponents of slavery organized themselves, in 1848, into the Free
Soil party, which in the ensuing Presidential election polled 300,000 votes for
its candidate, Van Buren. It sent Charles Sumner and Salmon P. Chase to the
Senate, and a considerable number of members to the House of Representatives.
The rapid settlement of California and the West soon became a disturbing element
in the situation. The people of Oregon organized a provisional Territorial
government, from which slavery was excluded. A convention held in California in
1849 adopted a similar measure, and an application was made to Congress for
admission of the Territory as a State with this proviso in its Constitution. A
fierce debate followed, the Southern extremists insisting on the organization of
California, Utah, and New Mexico, as Territories, with no restriction as to
slavery. The Free Soilers and many others demanded that California should be
admitted as a State, and that Territorial governments prohibiting slavery should
be given to Utah and New Mexico. The dispute ended in a compromise bill proposed
by Henry Clay, and accepted by Congress, in whose measures California was
admitted as a free State, Utah and New Mexico organized as Territories without
restriction as to slavery, the sale of slaves in the District of Columbia
prohibited, and provision made for the return of fugitive slaves from Northern
States.
For a while everything seemed settled: the compromise was spoken of as a
finality, and a state of public feeling prevailed which greatly discouraged
anti-slavery agitation. In the succeeding Presidential election the Free Soil
ticket received but 151,000 votes, and the party ended its political existence,
to be absorbed in 1855 into the Republican party, a new and strongly-
consolidated organization, which was destined to become famous in the succeeding
history of the country.
Yet the Fugitive Slave proviso of the compromise bill proved a rankling thorn
which gave abundant activity to the anti-slavery sentiment in the North. For
years previously slaves had been at intervals escaping to the free States, where
they found numerous friends to secrete them or assist them in their journey to
the safe soil of Canada. The organization for the aid and secretion of fugitive
slaves in time became very complete, and received the name of the "underground
railroad." Few slaves who crossed the border-line were recovered by their
masters, partly from the efficient measures of concealment taken by their
friends, and partly from the disinclination of the State and local authorities
to assist pursuers, and the legal obstructions which were occasionally placed in
their path.
Massachusetts passed a law to secure to such fugitives trial by jury.
Pennsylvania passed a law against kidnapping. A decision was finally made in the
United States Supreme Court which gave to the owner of a slave authority to
recapture him in any State of the Union, without regard to legal processes. Yet
little benefit was gained by the South from this decision. The States readily
obeyed the mandate against interference. Some of them forbade their courts to
hear claims of this character, and laid severe penalties on officers who should
arrest or jailers who should detain alleged fugitive slaves. The difficulty thus
produced was obviated in the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850. Commissioners were
appointed by the United States to hear such cases, and marshals and their
deputies were required to execute warrants for the arrest of fugitives, with a
penalty equal to the full value of the slave if they should suffer one to escape
after arrest. Other features of this bill increased its stringency, and under
its provisions there was little hindrance to a free negro being kidnapped and
taken South as a slave. The commissioners in certain cases refused to listen to
evidence in favor of the freedom of the alleged fugitive.
A law thus enforced could not fail to arouse indignation, even in those devoid
of anti-slavery sympathies. Cases of the arrest of fugitives took place in many
parts of the Northern States, in which the requirements of ordinary law and
humanity were disregarded, and the captives carried South with little or no
effort to prove that they were the persons claimed as fugitives. Hundreds, in
all parts of the North, who had viewed the controversy with in-difference and
looked upon the abolitionists as a band of wild radicals, had their sympathies
awakened by cases of this kind occurring in their own neighborhoods; and there
can be no doubt that the operation of the Fugitive Slave Law, while it saved to
the South a certain portion of its flying property, greatly added to Northern
hostility to slavery, and backed up the ardent abolitionists with an extensive
body of moderate sympathizers.
In December, 1853, a bill was introduced into Congress by Mr. Dodge, a Senator
from Iowa, for the organization of the Territory of Nebraska. Mr. Dixon, of
Kentucky, proposed, as an amendment to this bill, to abrogate the Missouri
Compromise and permit the citizens of the Southern States to take and hold their
slaves within any of the new Territories or the States formed therefrom. On
January 23, 1854, the bill was reported back from committee by Mr. Douglas,
modified to propose the formation of two Territories, the southern to be called
Kansas and the northern Nebraska. It retained the principle of the Dixon
amendment, and for four months thereafter a hot debate was maintained in the
halls of Congress. Despite the utmost efforts of Northern members, and the
numerous petitions from the best element of the Northern people, the bill was
carried by the South, the compromise measure which had been accepted as a
finality for thirty-five years flung to the winds, and the whole territory from
the Mississippi to the Rocky Mountains thrown open as a new field of battle
between the advocates of slavery and freedom. In 1857 the South gained another
victory, in the decision of the Supreme Court in the Dred Scott case, in which
the Missouri Compromise was declared to be unconstitutional, the action recently
taken by Congress being thus sustained by the highest tribunal in the land.
The truce between slavery and freedom which had been maintained for thirty-five
years was broken. The war was about to recommence with tenfold energy. The
events above described had very greatly strengthened the abolition party in the
North, and all other questions of public policy grew unimportant before the
imminent demands of this. A reorganization of parties became necessary. The old
Whig party had received its death-blow. The Democratic party divided into two
sections, on new lines. Finally the Free Soilers and a section of the Whigs and
Democrats fused together in opposition to the new aggressive attitude of
slavery, and the Republican party came into existence, while the pro-slavery
members of the old parties joined hands as a modified Democracy. The country was
drifting it knew not whither. The armies were in the field, arrayed for
legislative battle, and the hot and bitter sentiment that was widely manifested
was full of the elements of actual war.
The first phase of hostility declared itself on the soil of Kansas, organized as
a Territory on May 30, 1854. The decision that slavery might be introduced there
led to warlike conflicts between settlers from the Northern States and armed
parties from the adjoining slave State of Missouri. An organized effort had been
made by the anti-slavery societies of the North to secure Kansas, by
colonization with emigrants of abolition sentiments. Missouri made an equally
strong effort to secure it to slavery, but rather by violence than by
colonization. An armed band of two hundred and fifty Missourians marched upon
the settlers at the new town of Lawrence, and threatened to drive them out at
the point of the bayonet if they did not immediately strike their tents and
leave the Territory. They refused to do so, and their assailants retired,
without carrying out their threat. But this battle of words was followed by a
series of sanguinary assaults upon the settlers, in which a state of actual war
was inaugurated.
An election for a Territorial legislature was ordered in 1855. The slave-holders
of Missouri and Arkansas at once adopted a new expedient. They entered the
Territory in large bands, took possession of the polling-places, drove the
actual settlers from the polls, and cast their votes in favor of pro-slavery
candidates. Though the settlers numbered but 2905 voters, there were cast at
this mockery of an election 6320 votes. In 1857 the pro-slavery legislature met,
formed a Constitution, submitted it to the people, and ratified it at an
election in which no votes in opposition were allowed or counted. This
fraudulent operation was endorsed by the administration, but it was soon proved
that the Free State settlers of Kansas were too greatly in the majority to be
thus dealt with. A convention was held at Wyandotte in 1859, in the election of
whose members, though many fraudulent pro-slavery votes were again polled, the
Free State party gained a decided majority. A Constitution was adopted in which
slavery was prohibited. This was submitted to popular suffrage, and carried by a
vote of 10,421 for to 5530 against. In 1860, after the withdrawal of the
Southern members from Congress, the State was admitted under this Constitution.
The story of abolition may here be briefly ended. From being a Congressional
issue it had been made a warlike issue in Kansas. This violent method was
carried to the halls of Congress, where, in May, 1856, Charles Sumner delivered
one of his most vigorous and telling speeches on "The Crime against Kansas." As
a result he was assailed by Preston S. Brooks of South Carolina, knocked down
with a heavy cane, and beaten so severely that he never fully recovered from the
effects. This cowardly and outrageous assault added greatly to the earnestness
of abolition sentiment in the North, and had its share in arousing that
fanatical outbreak in which John Brown seized Harper's Ferry and attempted to
excite a slave-insurrection. This event will be considered at length in a
succeeding article.
In the Presidential election of 1860 the rapid growth of anti-slavery sentiment
in the North was evidenced in the election of Abraham Lincoln, the Republican
candidate, to the Presidency, while the bitterness of hostile feeling in the
South was indicated in the secession movements that quickly followed. Though it
was declared by Congress, after the outbreak of the war, that hostilities were
not prosecuted with any intention of interfering with the "established
institutions" of the seceding States, yet it proved impossible to keep measures
of abolition out of the contest.
Slavery was at first dealt with from the immediate stand-point of war. Slave
property employed in acts against the government was declared confiscated, the
army was forbidden to return fugitive slaves, and slavery was abolished in the
District of Columbia and in the Territories. Later, the employment of negroes as
soldiers was authorized. Two army commanders, Fremont in Missouri and Hunter in
South Carolina, took it upon themselves to issue proclamations abolishing
slavery within their fields of command. This unauthorized action was disavowed
by the President. Though in favor of abolition, he belevied that slave-holders
ought to be compensated for their lost property, and in December, 1862, he
offered to the consideration of Congress three constitutional amendments, in
which he proposed to compensate States which should abolish slavery before 1900
and to colonize free negroes out of the country. Though these recommendations
were not considered, yet gradual emancipation was incorporated in 1862 in the
Constitution of West Virginia, and in that of Missouri in 1863. Maryland, in
1864, adopted immediate abolition. On September 22, 1862, President Lincoln
issued a preliminary proclamation, and on January 1, 1863, a final one,
definitely abolishing slavery in the hostile States, with the exception of the
parishes of Louisiana and the counties of Virginia which were then within the
Union lines. Though it has been claimed that the President had neither
constitutional nor physical power to abolish slavery in these States, and that
therefore his action was nugatory, yet its effect proved sufficiently positive.
As the Federal armies advanced, slavery disappeared behind them. Of the slave
States not included in the proclamation, Kentucky and Delaware alone took no
action on the subject of slavery, but the institution was everywhere near its
death. On April 8, 1864, the thirteenth amendment to the Constitution,
abolishing slavery within the limits of the United States, was offered in
Congress, and in 1865 it was ratified by thirty-one of the thirty-six States.
The work begun by The Liberator in 1830 was thus completed, and every man,
woman, and child within the United States of America was declared free from the
date of December 18, 1865.
Charles Morris
|
|
| |
