The origins of the Civil War cannot be pinned down to a sole cause, but to a complex mixture of causes that,

to a certain degree, have as an inherent component the issue of slavery, even though slavery does not represent the reason why the war started. As a matter of fact, historians argue that slavery was beginning to decline in the South and that it would have eventually died out on its own, due to its gradually growing cost-ineffectiveness and archaic system. Before the achievement of independence, slavery was present in all American colonies and so it was not a reason for conflicting ideologies. As a consequence of independence, the Northern states started to consider that slavery clashed with the principles of the Revolution and therefore implemented programs of gradual emancipation. There were fewer slaves in the North, to start with and they were not a vital part of Northern economies. Quite on the contrary: they were considered to be a threat to the jobs of white working-class men, who were in great numbers in the North, mainly due to migration. The South faced different circumstance, because it relied mainly on agriculture, the wealth of many states depending on the cash crops the slaves grew. Since southerners believed that white people could not, would not or should not do the backbreaking labor of the slaves, they were determined to keep the institution of slavery and even to expand it to new territories. The institution of slavery became the apple of discord between the North and the South not only because of a difference in mentality and attitude towards slave exploitation, but also on account of territorial, economical and political disputes that actually stood at the core of the war. To start with, territorial expansion led to disputes whether the new territories that were granted statehood should enter the Union as free states or as slave states. Even though slaves had no rights whatsoever, they counted as three fifths of a person when establishing the number of congressional representatives and so the south was quite powerful. Northerners believed that the

South already had too much power and so they were opposed to any expansion of slavery over new territories, in order to prevent a strengthening of that power. In order to keep the balance between free and slave states in the Union, a compromise was reached, so as to avoid conflicts caused by territorial expansion the Missouri Compromise of 1820, which divided the land acquired in the Louisiana Purchase into two areas, above and below the parallel of 36 degrees 30 minutes north latitude. This line drew the boundaries between free states to the North and slave states to the South. Another provision of this compromise, which was never actually a written part of the law was that states should enter the Union in pairs, in order to ensure equality between slave-state senators and free-state senator. ________________________________________________________________________

Provision

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
By 1819 several Northern congressmen felt aggrieved by the power of the South in national affairs. Southerners dominated national politics through the operation of the Three-Fifths Compromise. Slaves, legally considered a form of property, were allowed to count as three-fifths of a person for the calculation of population to determine the number of congressional representatives a state would have. The Three-Fifths Compromise gave Southerners an edge in electing presidents and constructing majorities in Congress, and through it they managed to dominate the Democratic-Republican party, the party of Thomas Jefferson. Northerners were also angry at the policies of the two presidents from Virginia, Jefferson (18011809) and James Madison (18091817). Restrictions on trade with Great Britain and France, including an embargo on American shipping in 1808, and the War of 1812 had all hurt the economy of Northern states. To make matters worse, the Federalist Party, which often pushed for policies that benefited the North, bungled its opposition to the war and managed to commit suicide by appearing traitorous. Meanwhile, Southern slavery was spreading to the Great Lakes area (the present states of Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, and Wisconsin), where it had been prohibited by the Northwest Ordinance of 1787. By 1818 it looked as if Southern migrants to Illinois and Indiana were trying to smuggle the

"peculiar institution" into those states by calling the practice "indentured servitude" This too provoked the outrage of Northerners.

The first attempt to settle this territorial dispute was an agreement called the Compromise of 1820, which was also known as the Missouri Compromise. This compromise was formed at a time when there was equilibrium between slave and Free states, with eleven of each. The Missouri Compromise was an attempt to maintain the balance in the Senate. As Maine was admitted as a free state, Missouri was simultaneously
Circumstances in the newly formed Southern states were quite different. The African American population, both slave and free, was much larger Because of their ingrained racial prejudice and ignorance about the sophisticated cultures in Africa from which many of their slaves came, Southern whites were convinced that free blacks would be savages--a threat to white survival. So Southerners believed that slavery was necessary as a means of race control. Of equal importance in the Southern states was the economic role that slaves played. These states were much more dependent on the agricultural sector of their economies than were Northern ones. Much of the wealth of Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, the Carolinas, and Georgia came from the cash crops that slaves grew. Indeed, many white Southerners did not believe white men could (or should) do the backbreaking labor required to produce tobacco, cotton, rice, and indigo, which were the regions chief cash crops. As a consequence of these factors, the Southern states were determined to retain slavery after the Revolution. Thus began the fatal division between "free states" and "slave states" that led to sectionalism and, ultimately, to civil war. The final, decadent phase of slavery was reached when the land upon which the cash crops were grown had become exhausted--the nutrients in the soil needed to produce large harvests were depleted. When that happened, the slave regime typically became more relaxed and less labor-intensive. Plantation owners turned to growing grain crops like wheat, barley, corn, and vegetables. Masters needed fewer slaves, and those slaves were not forced to work as hard because the cultivation of these crops required less labor. In 1860, families owning more than fifty slaves numbered less than 10,000; those owning more than a hundred numbered less than 3,000 in the whole South. The typical Southern slave owner possessed one or two slaves, and the typical white Southern male owned none. He was an artisan, mechanic, or more frequently, a small farmer. This reality is vital in understanding why white Southerners went to war to defend slavery in 1861. Most of them did not have a direct financial investment in the system. Their willingness to fight in its defense was more complicated and subtle than simple fear of monetary loss. They deeply believed in the Southern way of life, of which slavery was an inextricable part. They also were convinced that Northern

threats to undermine slavery would unleash the pent-up hostilities of 4 million African American slaves who had been subjugated for centuries. REGULATING SLAVERY. One half of all Southerners in 1860 were either slaves themselves or members of slaveholding families. These elite families shaped the mores and political stance of the South, which reflected their common concerns. Foremost among these were controlling slaves and assuring an adequate supply of slave labor. The legislatures of the Southern states passed laws designed to protect the masters right to their human chattel. Central to these laws were "slave codes," which in their way were grudging admissions that slaves were, in fact, human beings, not simply property like so many cattle or pigs. They attempted to regulate the system so as to minimize the possibility of slave resistance or rebellion. In all states the codes made it illegal for slaves to read and write, to attend church services without the presence of a white person, or to testify in court against a white person. Slaves were forbidden to leave their home plantation without a written pass from their masters. Additional laws tried to secure slavery by restricting the possibility of manumission (the freeing of ones slaves). Between 1810 and 1860, all Southern states passed laws severely restricting the right of slave owners to free their slaves, even in a will. Free blacks were dangerous, for they might inspire slaves to rebel. As a consequence, most Southern states required that any slaves who were freed by their masters leave the state within thirty days. As the preceding discussion makes clear, slavery in the antebellum South was overwhelmingly a rural phenomenon. This was, in part, because most slave owners believed that slavery would not work well in an urban industrialized environment. Slaves were thought to be too stupid to understand machinery and too careless to be trusted with complex tools. In fact, however, slaves were used successfully in factories such as the Tredegar Iron Works in Richmond. They also labored in the salt mines and turpentine plants of North Carolina, the coal mines of western Virginia, and the sugar mills of Louisiana. Moreover, when, during the Civil War, Southerners confronted a manpower shortage and the need for rapid industrialization, they quickly overcame their prejudices against using slaves in factories Simply put, slaves in cities were much more difficult to supervise.

Slaves rebelled and escaped much the same way as they did in the antebellum period. However during the civil war escaped slaves often provide great intelligence to the union forces. Despite this, the Confederacy and Union (4 states were Union Slave States) successfully used them to advance its war effort. White Southerners, though convinced of the African Americans inherent inferiority, were far less reluctant about putting the slaves to work militarily than were white Northerners. The Confederate government never used them as soldiers, but it did press them into labor brigades to build fortifications, dig latrines, and haul supplies. Tens of thousands of slaves toiled

for the Confederacy in a service both the bondsmen and their owners disliked. For the slave impressed into labor on the front-line, the work frequently was not only harder than that on the plantation but also dangerous. Because of the possibility of escape through Union lines, slaves at the front were much mote closely supervised than on their home farms. Moreover, those sent to work with the Confederate army were usually men in their prime, between eighteen and forty. Service with the army denied them their accustomed time with their wife and family. The slave owners, for their part, were reluctant to send their bondsmen to the front for two reasons. First, they risked the loss of their most valuable property, and, second, because the men were usually overworked and mistreated, they frequently returned to their homes in very poor physical condition. Thus, the owners often contrived to send only their most unmanageable and therefore least marketable slaves to the army (both in the confederacy and union). During the war, threatening to send a slave to the front became the disciplinary equivalent of threatening to sell a slave farther South in antebellum days. Ironically, as the South's cause became more desperate, masters were increasingly reluctant to send their slaves to the military. Slavery was dying, yet those with the most to lose hung on tenaciously to their human property, thereby withholding the one remaining resource that might have saved their nation--and them. The exigencies of war also finally settled the decades-old debate as to whether slaves could be used safely and efficiently in industry. The shortage of white manpower left the South with no other choice than to put slaves to work in its factories and mines. In the Tredegar Iron Works of Richmond alone, thousands of slaves were employed. The Augusta munitions plants of Georgia likewise were primarily staffed by bondsmen. Thousands of others labored in the ultimately futile effort to keep Southern rail lines operating. As with service on the front lines, this labor--especially in extractive industries like the coal mines and salt factories--was harsher than life on the plantation, and slaves resisted it if they could. Many made the long-delayed decision to run away when faced with such dire prospects. Although their service was extracted involuntarily, slaves in industry and on the battlefield enabled the South to fight on longer than would have been possible otherwise. In the final desperate days of the war, the Confederacy even considered using blacks as soldiers, offering emancipation as a reward. The Union had struck that bargain two years earlier. The Southern proposal was made in February 1865 and approved, in part, on March 13 of that year. By then Southerners of both races knew the Confederacy was doomed. Richmond fell less than thirty days later. The provision was never implemented and no slaves officially served as soldiers in the Confederate Military.
Slavery was actually not one of the leading causes of the Civil War. It only became an issue after the Emancipation Proclamation. Many soldiers and their officers were angry with President Lincoln for making the war about slavery. The average soldier did not care about freeing slaves: he was fighting to keep his country together. Secession was the main cause of the Civil War. It was different depending on which part of the Civil War and which part of the US. The North did not discriminate against African Americans as much as the South did, but they weren't perfect. It took them

a while to allow African Americans to fight, and once they did, they were often the bud of jokes and the such. They were also only allowed to fight the few African American only regiments, with only white leadership. The 54th Massachusetts was one such all African American regiment, made famous by the movie Glory. They were used in a suicide mission, which shows you how horribly they were treated. I suggest watching the movie, it is really good, and will help you answer your question. There is a ton of information, but I hope the little bit her has helped.

Only 4 states that "stayed" in the Union at the time of the war had slaves. Delaware: small state, small population, # of slaves was something like 150.... in other words, insignificant Maryland: Essentially kept in the Union by force Kentucky: Treated by the Union as a neutral party until the South invaded. Missouri: Stayed in the Union but pretty much decimated by guerrilla warfare on both sides, fairly lawless. The North fought to preserve the Union, but they were put in that position by the South. All the reasons for Southern succession point, directly or indirectly, back to the legacy of slavery. The civil war was all about states rights vs federal rights and the right to secede. Slavery exacerbated that issue. Lincoln used slavery to help him win the war. He emancipated the slaves in an effort to dominate the south. It was more that than actually wanting to free humans from a corrupt institution. Note that the emancipation only freed slaves in the south not the north.