Economic causes of the Civil War

wausaubob

Colonel
Member of the Month
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Location
Denver, CO
Wrong as we think slavery is, we can yet afford to let it alone where it is, because that much is due to the necessity arising from its actual presence in the nation; but can we, while our votes will prevent it, allow it to spread into the National Territories, and to overrun us here in these Free States? If our sense of duty forbids this, then let us stand by our duty, fearlessly and effectively. Let us be diverted by none of those sophistical contrivances wherewith we are so industriously plied and belabored - contrivances such as groping for some middle ground between the right and the wrong, vain as the search for a man who should be neither a living man nor a dead man - such as a policy of "don't care" on a question about which all true men do care - such as Union appeals beseeching true Union men to yield to Disunionists, reversing the divine rule, and calling, not the sinners, but the righteous to repentance - such as invocations to Washington, imploring men to unsay what Washington said, and undo what Washington did.http://www.abrahamlincolnonline.org/lincoln/speeches/cooper.htm

This is a quote from Lincoln's 1860 Cooper Union speech. He clearly states that his party opposes the extension of slavery into the territories.
Since Kansas was very far progressed in admission with an anti-slavery constitution, there was 19-15 ratio of free states to slave states.
If Abraham Lincoln was elected as President, 15 was going to be the maximum number of slave states.
If slaves could not be utilized in the territories, the slave economy was not going to expand, and the demand for slaves was going to depend on economic conditions in the south's agricultural economy. The value of slaves was most likely going to go down.
Lincoln was elected and 7 of the slave states seceded before he was sworn in as President.
 
Back
Top