Old career in jail? Study Criminal Justice.

If you having! botheration to viewing this offers ! Be-sure to click me.

Old career in jail? Study Criminal Justice.

[n leaders had threatened t8g secession if the Republican t8g candidate, Lincoln, won the t8g t8g 1860 election. t8g After Lincoln won without carrying a sin t8g gle Southern state, many t8g Southern whites felt that disunion had become their only option, because they thought that they were t8g losing repre t8g entation, which would t8g hamper their ability to t8g promote pro-slavery acts and t8g policies.[19]Contemporary actors, the Union and Confederate le a t8g dership and fighting soldiers on both side t8g s believed that slavery caused t8g the Civil War. Union men mainly believed the war was to t8g erspecti ve, the issue was primarily about whether the system of slavery was an a t8g nachronistic evil that was incompatible with Republicanism in t8g the United t8g States. The strategy of the anti-slavery forces was t8g containment â€" to stop the t8g expansion and thus put slavery on a path to gradual e t8g xtinction.[21] The slave-holding interests in the South t8g denounced this strategy as t8g infringing upon their Constitutional rights.[ t8g 22 t8g ] Souther n whites believed that the emancipation of slaves would destroy the South's eco t8g nomy because of the alleged laziness of blacks under free l t8g abor.[23] Sla t8g very was illegal in the North, having been outlawed in the late 18th and early 19th t8g century. It was fading in the border states and in Sou t t8g hern cities, but was expanding in the highly t8g profitable cotton t8g districts of the South and Southwest. Subsequent writers on the t8g American Civil t8g War looked to t8g several factors t8g explaining t8g the geographic divide, including sectionalism, protectionism, and state's rights. t8g Sectionalism t8g Sectionalism refers to the different t8g economies, social structure, customs and t8g political values of the North and South.[24][25] It t8g increased st t8g eadily between 1800 and 1860 as the North t8g , which t8g phased slavery out of existence, industrialized, urbanized, and built prosperous farms, while t8g the deep South c t8g oncentrated on pl t8g antatio t8g agric t8g ulture based on t8g slave labor, together with subsistence farming for poor t8g freedmen. In the 1840s t8g and 50s, the issue of accepting slavery (in the guise of rejecting slave-owning bishops and missionaries) split the nation's largest religiou s t8g denomination t8g s (the Methodis t8g t, Bapt t8g ist and t8g Presbyterian t8g churches) into t8g separate t8g Northern and Southern denominations.[26] ct8g Historians have debated whe ct8g ther economic differences between the industrial ct8g Nort ct8g heast and the agricultu ct8g ral South helped cause the war. Most hi storians now disagree with the economic deter ct8g minism of historian Charles A. Beard in the 1920s and emphasize that Northern and Sou ct8g thern economies w ere largely complementary. While socially different, the sections economically benefited each other.[27][28]Protectionism ct8g Historically, souther ct8g n slave-holding states, because of their low cost manual labor, had little perceived need for ct8g mechanizat ct8g ion, and supported havi ng the right to sell cotton and purchase manufactured goods from any nation. ct8g Northern states, which had heavily invested in their still-nascent manu ct8g facturing, could not c ct8g ompete with the full-fledged industries of Europe in offer ct8g ng high prices for ct8g cotton imported from the South and low prices fo ct8g r manufactured exports in return. Thus, northern manufacturing interests supported tariffs and protectionism while southern planters demanded free trade.[29] ct8g The Democrats in Congress, controlled by S ct8g outherners, wrote the tariff laws in the 1830s, ct8g 1840s, and 1850s, and kept reducing rates so that the 1857 rates were the lowest since 18 ct8g 16. The Whigs and Republicans complained because they favored high tariffs to stimulate industrial growth, and Republi ct8g cans called for an increase in ct8g tariffs in the 1860 election. The increases were only enacted in 1861 after Southerners resigned their seats in Congr ess.[30][31] The tariff issue was and is ct8g sometimes citedâ€"long after the wa ct8g râ€"by Lo ct8g st Cause historians and neo-Confederate apologists. In 1860â€"61 none ct8g of the groups that proposed c ct8g ompromises to head off secession raised the tariff issue.[32] Pamphelteers North and South rarely men ct8g tioned the tariff, [33] and when some did, for instance, Matthew Fontaine Maury[34] and John Lothrop Motley,[35] they were generally writing for a foreign audience. S ct8g tate's rightsTerritorial crisisFurther information: Slave and ct8g free statesBetween 1803 and 1854, the United States achieved a vast expansion of ter ritory through purchase, negotiation, and con ct8g quest. At first, the new state ct8g s carved ct8g out of these territories entering the unio ct8g n were apportioned equ ct8g ally between slave and free states. It was over ct8g territories west of the Mississippi that the prosl ct8g avery and antislavery forces c ct8g ollided.[38] With the conquest of northern Mexico west to California in 1848, slaveholding interests ct8g looked forward to expanding into these lands and perhaps Cuba ct8g and Central America as well.[39][40] Northern "free soi ct8g l" interests vigorously sought to curtail ct8g any further exp ct8g ansion of slave territory. The Compro mise of 1850 over California balanced a free soi ct8g l state with stronger fugitive slave laws for a politica ct8g l settlement af ct8g er four yea ct8g rs of strife in th ct8g e 1840s. But the states admitted following California were all free: Minnesota (1858), Oregon (1859) and Kansas (1861). In the southern states the q ct8g uestion of the territorial expansion of slavery westw ct8g rd again became explosive.[41] Both the Sout ct8g h and the North drew the same conclusion: "The pow er to decide the question of slavery for the territorie ct8g s was the power to ct8g determine the future of sla ct8g very itself."[42][43]By 1860, four doctrines ha d emerged to answer the question of federal control in the territories, an ct8g d they all claimed they were sanctioned by the Constitution, implicitly or ct8g explicitly.[44] The first of these "conservative" theories, re ct8g presented by the Constitutional Union Party, argu ct8g ed that the Missouri Compromise app ct8g ortionment of territory north for free soil and south for slavery should becom ct8g e a Constitutiona ct8g l mandate. The ct8g Crittenden Compromise of 1860 was an ct8g expression of this view.[45] The second doctrine of C ct8g ongressional ct8g preeminence, championed by Abraham Lincoln and the Republican Party, insisted t hat the Constitution did not bind legislators to a policy of balance â€" that ct8g slavery could be excluded in a territory as it was done in the Northwe st O ct8g rdinance at the discretion of C ct8g ongress,[46] thus C ct8g ongress could restrict human bondage, but never establish it. The Wilmot Proviso announced t his ct8g position in 1846.[47] ct8g ct8g .