Saturday, November 27, 2010

Homestead Act of 1862

The Homestead Act was passed May 20, 1862. It either alloted 160 acres to anyone for $10 and a promise to farm it for five years, or allowed anyone to purchase land for $1.25 after living on the land for six months. While this act distributed millions of acres of land to eager Easterners and Europeans, many were not able to work the land efficiently. These homesteaders often did not have the money to purchase the necessary farm equipment or sustain themselves until the farm started producing, and much of the land in fact fell into the hands of speculators or else was fraudulently "improved." Much of it also went to railroad companies. While the Homestead Act did not act totally accordingly to plan, further acts spurred from the Homestead Act successfully distributed further land grants to farmers.



Divine, Robert A., T. H. Breen, George M. Fredrickson, and R. Hal Williams. America Past and Present. Revised Sixth Edition, AP* Edition . Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers Inc., 2003. 502. Print.

Weiser, Kathy. "The Homestead Act." Legends of America. Legends of America, Apr 2010. Web. 27 Nov 2010. <http://www.legendsofamerica.com/ah-homestead.html>.

Act of May 20, 1862 (Homestead Act), Public Law 37-64, 05/20/1862; Record Group 11; General Records of the United States Government; National Archives.

Web. 27 Nov 2010. <http://cache.boston.com/bonzai-fba/Third_Party_Photo/2009/01/31/dubrow__1233380189_4089.jpg>.

Friday, November 26, 2010

Dawes Act of 1887

In dealing with Native Americans in the 1870s and onward, many took an assimilationist stance. With the abundance of land in the western half of the United States, the federal government decided to allot Native Americans individual land grants, moving away from their previous policy of tribal reservations.

The Dawes Severalty Act was passed by Congress in 1887. It gave 160 acres to the head of an Indian family, 80 acres for other single adults, and 40 acres for children. This land was held "in trust for the sole use and benefit of the Indian to whom such allotment shall have been made" in order to discourage speculators. Provided that the Indians assimilated to this farming life, they would earn citizenship. However, of the 47 million acres of land granted by this act, much of it was unsuitable and infertile, with the better land sold to white settlers. The idea of giving Native Americans a very American job of farming and ridding them of their tribal ways did not come into fruition because of the sub-par land and tools the Native Americans were given. A foreign practice to them, farming did not assimilate the Native Americans as some idealists had hoped it would.



Divine, Robert A., T. H. Breen, George M. Fredrickson, and R. Hal Williams. America Past and Present. Revised Sixth Edition, AP* Edition . Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers Inc., 2003. 499. Print.

An Act to Provide for the Allotment of Lands in Severalty to Indians on the Various Reservations (General Allotment Act or Dawes Act), Statutes at Large 24, 388-91, NADP Document A1887.

"The Dawes Act (1887)." New Perspectives on THE WEST. PBS, 2001. Web. 26 Nov 2010. <http://www.pbs.org/weta/thewest/resources/archives/eight/dawes.htm>.

Web. 26 Nov 2010. <http://www.historicaltrauma.com/indianland.jpg>.

Thursday, November 25, 2010

Compromise of 1877

The election of 1876 included Republican nominee Rutherford B. Hayes, Democratic nominee Samuel J. Tilden, and Greenback nominee Peter Cooper. From the Civil War until this point, the Republican party had a firm hold on the nation. However, discontented Southerners and disillusioned Northerners showed a favorable reaction to the Democratic candidate Tilden, and, after the vote was counted, Tilden won the popular vote and seemed be on the path toward victory. Tilden was only one electoral vote short of victory when the results from South Carolina, Florida, and Louisiana were challenged.

To resolve this issue, Congress created a commission to resolve the contested votes. Comprised of seven Democrats, seven Republicans, and one independent, the election commission disputed for several months, but when the independent resigned and a Republican took his place, the commission voted to give Hayes the disputed votes and thus win the election.

The decision passed through the Senate and House due to the compromise struck between the Republicans and Democrats. The Democrats allowed Hayes to become president in exchange for control of the South returning to the South. This in turn returned white Democratic rule to the South with the minority of Republicans forgotten and powerless.

Rutherford B. Hayes


Divine, Robert A., T. H. Breen, George M. Fredrickson, and R. Hal Williams. America Past and Present. Revised Sixth Edition, AP* Edition . Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers Inc., 2003. 474-75. Print.

Neale, Thomas H. "The compromise of 1877." LEARN NC. U.S. Department of State, 2009. Web. 25 Nov 2010. <http://www.learnnc.org/lp/editions/nchist-civilwar/5470>.

Web. 25 Nov 2010. <http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/scn-1877-hayes.htm>.

Sunday, November 14, 2010

Proclamation of Amnesty and Reconstruction & the Wade-Davis Bill

President Lincoln and Congress had differing views on the reconstruction of the South. Lincoln, known for favoring the preservation of the Union, proposed a way of quickly readmitting the rebellious states. This was summarized in the Proclamation of Amnesty and Reconstruction in December 1863. This pardoned and returned property "all persons who have, directly or by implication, participated in the existing rebellion," save certain prominent Confederate leaders, as long as they took the following oath:
“I...do solemnly swear, in presence of Almighty God, that I will henceforth faithfully support, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Union of the States thereunder; and that I will, in like manner, abide by and faithfully support all acts of congress passed during the existing rebellion with reference to slaves, so long and so far as not repealed, modified, or held void by congress, or by decision of the supreme court; and that I will, in like manner, abide by and faithfully support all proclamations of the President made during the existing rebellion having reference to slaves, so long and so far as not modified or declared void by decision of the supreme court. So help me God.”
If ten percent of the population of a state in rebellion took this oath, then the state would be able to set up its state government in which abolition was required. By making these concessions to southern states, Lincoln hoped the war would be shortened; Louisiana and Arkansas were in fact already on the path to statehood along these lines by 1864.

Members of Congress felt Lincoln was much to easy on southerners who they felt were traitorous to the Union, and they refused to acknowledge new members from Louisiana and Arkansas. They also felt that Lincoln was overstepping his position as president, and that Congress should decide by which means the rebellious states should be readmitted to the Union. Congress' legislative response to Lincoln's ten-percent plan was the Wade-Davis Bill. This required fifty percent of the voting population to take the oath, and only non-Confederates could participate in the state's constitutional convention. It also strongly encouraged black suffrage. Lincoln, already on bad terms with Congress, did not want to veto the bill, but he would not accept reversing his own efforts at bringing an easy end to the war. Therefore, he use a pocket veto to nullify the bill, and due to his assassination, the conflict between Lincoln and Congress was never resolved, and the issue of Reconstruction passed to Andrew Johnson.


Divine, Robert A., T. H. Breen, George M. Fredrickson, and R. Hal Williams. America Past and Present. Revised Sixth Edition, AP* Edition . Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers Inc., 2003. 456-57. Print.

“Lincoln issues Proclamation of Amnesty and Reconstruction.” 2010. The History Channel website. Nov 14 2010, 9:51 http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/lincoln-issues-proclamation-of-amnesty-and-reconstruction.

"Proclamation of Amnesty and Reconstruction, December 8, 1863." Freedmen and Southern Society Project. University of Maryland, n.d. Web. 14 Nov 2010. <http://www.history.umd.edu/Freedmen/procamn.htm>.

Saturday, November 13, 2010

Reconstruction Amendments

The first of the Reconstruction Amendments, the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution abolished slavery. It was proposed on January 31, 1865, and it was ratified on December 6, 1865 by all the northern states and eight former Confederate states. Ratified on July 9, 1868, the Fourteenth Amendment asserts that all native-born or naturalized Americans "are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside;" this meant that African Americans would then be considered American citizens. It also allowed state representation to be based on numbers of voting-age males that are not "any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime." This was in response to the Republican worry that the South would gain a considerable number of representatives due to their increase in number represented--the addition of former slaves. Another provision hostile towards Southern interests is that no former Confederate could hold office. The final section of the Fourteenth Amendment repudiates the Confederate debt. The final Reconstruction Amendment, ratified on February 3, 1870, ensured former slaves' voting rights.
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude
Although this amendment was required for Virginia, Texas, Mississippi, and Georgia to rejoin the Union, many white supremacists and Democratic supporters found ways to still encroach upon blacks' rights to vote in the form of literacy tests and poll taxes among other things. This is a accurate portrayal of how these efforts and many other efforts like them that tried to help the newly freed slaves were not effective enough to empower them to be active citizens of the United States.


Divine, Robert A., T. H. Breen, George M. Fredrickson, and R. Hal Williams. America Past and Present. Revised Sixth Edition, AP* Edition . Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers Inc., 2003. 462, 471. Print.

Mount, Steve. "Notes on the Amendments." U.S. Constitution Onlie. N.p., 08 Sep 2010. Web. 13 Nov 2010. <http://www.usconstitution.net/constamnotes.html>.

"14th Amendment." Legal Information Institute at Cornell Law School. LII, n.d. Web. 13 Nov 2010. <http://topics.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv>.

"The Constitution of the United States: Amendments 11-27." Charters of Freedom - The Declaration of Independence, The Constitution, The Bill of Rights. National Archives and Records Administration, n.d. Web. 13 Nov 2010. <http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_amendments_11-27.html>.

Sunday, October 17, 2010

Kansas-Nebraska Act

Tensions were to reach a new high when Illinois Senator Stephen A. Douglas proposed to organize the Kansas and Nebraska territories on the basis of popular sovereignty. He did so to appeal to the Southerners while the Northerners were outraged because this would repeal the line set by the Missouri Compromise.

Douglas proposed this bill largely out of personal interest. He wanted to open up the territory to railway expansion and make available land for settlement and trade. Also, as a Democrat, he thought this spirit of expansion would revive and unite the Democratic party, who had earlier in the century been under the banner of Manifest Destiny. All this, he hoped, would eventually gain him the presidency. However, while the bill was passed in both the Senate and the House, half of the northern Democrats voted against the bill, and Douglas' bill destroyed any sectional consensus left. Other political side effects were the dissolution of the Whigs and the eventual creation of the Republican Party.

Stephen A. Douglas


Divine, Robert A., T. H. Breen, George M. Fredrickson, and R. Hal Williams. America Past and Present. Revised Sixth Edition, AP* Edition . Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers Inc., 2003. 398-99. Print.

Web. 17 Oct 2010. < http://www.kshs.org/research/topics/politics/graphics/douglas_stephen.jpg >.

Saturday, October 16, 2010

Compromise of 1850

Once more, the Great Compromiser Henry Clay took it upon himself to help solve the sectional crisis the United States was experiencing in the first half of the eighteenth century. When California requested to enter the nation as a free state in 1849, Southerners cried foul at this potential disturbance of the careful balance between slave-owning and free states. The Compromise of 1850, as a series of five pieces of legislation, helped to keep the North and South at bay, delaying the onset of war.

In addition to allowing California into the country as a free state, Clay proposed establishing territorial governments in the Utah and New Mexico territories--territory gained from the Mexican cession--on the basis of popular sovereignty. Also, the Compromise settled the boundary dispute between Mexico and Texas. A newly-edited, harsher and more severe Fugitive Slave Law was enacted. While these concessions were made to the South, the Compromise prohibited the slave trade in Washington, DC as a concession to the North.

Most Democrats supported the bill, as did southern Whigs. It was opposed, though, by President Zachary Taylor; however, Taylor died and Millard Fillmore, his successor, was in favor of the Compromise. The general success of the Compromise and the near-consensus along party lines eased sectional tensions in the United States for a time.




Divine, Robert A., T. H. Breen, George M. Fredrickson, and R. Hal Williams. America Past and Present. Revised Sixth Edition, AP* Edition . Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers Inc., 2003. 395-97. Print.
"Our Documents - Compromise of 1850 (1850)." Our Documents - Home. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 Oct 2010. < http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=true&doc=27 >
Compromise of 1850 and Popular Sovereignty Map. Web. 16 Oct 2010. < http://thomaslegion.net/thecompromiseof1850andpopularsovereigntymap.html >.

Thursday, October 14, 2010

The Wilmot Proviso

Shortly after the Mexican-American War, the question of slavery in territories extended to the newly-acquired Mexican cession. One viewpoint of how this territory should be settled was that of the northern Democrats, who were "jealous of the power of the South" and who sought to establish the Mexican cession as territory free from slavery.

Pennsylvanian Congressman David Wilmot proposed an amendment such as this. Like most Northerners, Wilmot, while opposed to slavery, was not racially accepting; thus he gained support by associating his Proviso with the plight of the white laborer, giving him a chance to settle in this territory "without the disgrace which association brings on white labor."

"Provided that, as an express and fundamental condition to the acquisition of any territory from the Republic of Mexico by the United States...neither slavery nor involuntary servitude shall ever exist in any part of said territory, except for crime, whereof the party shall first be duly convicted"

Although backed also by northern Whigs and passed by the House, the Wilmot Proviso was not passed by the Senate. The Proviso furthered sectional tensions; while most of the North supported this "Free-Soil" mindset, the South asserted that southerners should be able to take their slaves into any territories they wished--a proposition on the opposite end of the spectrum from the Wilmot Proviso. Once more, it was found a compromise was needed to settle a sectional issue.


Divine, Robert A., T. H. Breen, George M. Fredrickson, and R. Hal Williams. America Past and Present. Revised Sixth Edition, AP* Edition . Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers Inc., 2003. 392. Print.


"The Wilmot Proviso, 1846." Vincent Ferraro, Resources for the Study of International Relations and Foreign Policy. Mount Holyoke College, 01 Feb 2010. Web. 14 Oct 2010. <http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/wilmot.htm>.

Wednesday, October 13, 2010

Jackson's Force Bill and the Nullification Crisis

Disagreeing viewpoints on states' rights began as early as the 1820s when South Carolina found the ever-rising protective tariff offensive to the South, whose economy was based on agriculture and who had to pay higher prices for manufactured goods because of this. South Carolina, coordinated by Vice President and strong states' rights supporter John C. Calhoun, disagreed with the tariff of abominations of 1828, deemed the tariff unconstitutional, and nullified it.

John C. Calhoun

Calhoun's outright defiance of national power caused a rift between himself and President Jackson. Jackson, although a supporter of southern interests and states' rights, rightly saw that nullification had the potential to damage the Union. After the state legislature of South Carolina convened to vote to nullify the tariffs of 1828 and 1832, Jackson decided to take action.

At Jackson's request, Congress passed the Force Bill that allowed Jackson to use military force to ensure that South Carolina would adhere to the tariff. The Great Compromiser Henry Clay once again used his superior compromising abilities to get Jackson to pass a lower tariff. The Force Bill and the compromise of 1833 both resulted in South Carolina abolishing their nullification efforts in March of the same year. This assertion of states' rights was reiterated as South Carolina seceded from the Union over a quarter of a century later.


Divine, Robert A., T. H. Breen, George M. Fredrickson, and R. Hal Williams. America Past and Present. Revised Sixth Edition, AP* Edition . Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers Inc., 2003. 295-96. Print.

Web. 13 Oct 2010. <http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/art/common/image/Painting_32_00009.htm>.

Monday, October 11, 2010

The Missouri Compromise









The prospective admittance of Missouri as a slave state opened the question of how slavery was going to be treated in the unorganized Louisiana territory. At this time, many Northerners were upset with the South's dominance in House of Representation due to the Three-Fifths compromise and thought the South had control over the presidency, and when Missouri was proposed to enter the nation as a slave state, the North was upset at this inequality. While New York Congressman James Tallmadge proposed to allow slavery in Missouri but abolish it over time, this was voted down in the Senate and the matter remained unsolved.

Meanwhile, Maine was seeking to separate from Massachusetts and enter into statehood. The Senate voted to enter Maine as free state along with Missouri as a slave state February 1820. Henry Clay helped to establish the latitude 36°30' as the compromise line, where all the unorganized territory above it was banned from instituting slavery and the territory below was permitted to establish slavery.



Henry Clay established himself as the Great Compromiser, and while the United States avoided this sectional dispute, this set the course of North-versus-South altercations for decades to come, culminating in the Civil War. The Missouri Compromise line was later to be negated by the Kansas-Nebraska Act, which only expanded the rift already present in the nation.

Divine, Robert A., T. H. Breen, George M. Fredrickson, and R. Hal Williams. America Past and Present. Revised Sixth Edition, AP* Edition . Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers Inc., 2003. 273-74. Print.

Web. 11 Oct 2010. <http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/art/common/image/Painting_32_00007.htm>.