Segment 1

It is 1860, and a man from Illinois, Abraham Lincoln, has won the presidency. But there will be no parades for
Lincoln, and little cheering, because the nation is about to go to war-with itself. Some people are saying that the
American experiment in democracy—started so bravely seventy-one years earlier—is finished. How could this
have happened?

The United States was born with a promise-and with a problem. The problem was slavery. By 1860 there are
four million black slaves in America. Henry Highland Garnet is a black minister who sees to the heart of the
problem. He says "Our race was brought to the shores of America. They came not with glad spirits to a land of
freedom. They came with broken hearts, and were doomed to unrequited toil and degradation."

And the promise of America—what was the promise? The promise is in the words of the Declaration of
Independence "We hold these truths to be self-evident; that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by
their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; that
to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the
governed." The Founders of the United States—who wrote of liberty and equality in that remarkable
Declaration and in a splendid Constitution—also gave their consent to slavery, which is the very opposite of
liberty and equality. Why did they do it? Many of the delegates to the Constitutional Convention that met in
Philadelphia in 1787 knew that slavery was wrong. And they said so. But the delegates from the Deep South
refused to sign the Constitution if it banned slavery. So the delegates compromised, and allowed it to continue.

Thomas Jefferson himself owned close to 200 slaves, he knew slavery in America would lead to terrible things.
"I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just," he wrote. "His justice cannot sleep forever."

Segment 1: The Church and the State  According to this section, one of the causes of the Civil War was a long-term
conflict or “contradiction” which had been around since the founding of the country. What was this contradiction? Who
was Thomas Jefferson, and how does his situation help illustrate this contradiction?
 Segment 2

The Slave Trade

Slavery first came to America with some of the earliest settlers But they weren't the first people to own human beings.
Slavery was an evil found around the world. There were jobs no one wanted to do, and, in the days before machinery,
slaves seemed an answer. If you were on the losing side of a war, or were kidnapped by a rival tribe or a thief, you might
end up a slave. Some Native Americans owned slaves. It was an ancient practice in Africa. But slavery in Africa was a
domestic institution. In America it would go way beyond that, developing into a system of enforced labor on vast
plantations. And while in Africa blacks were owned by other blacks, in America blacks were always owned by whites. In
America it would always be racial slavery.

By the eighteenth century there had developed a special pattern to the American slave trade. New England Yankees
often started it by taking their salted cod to the Caribbean island of Barbados-just north of Venezuela. There they traded
the fish for cane sugar. Then they headed back north to Virginia where they loaded tobacco before sailing east across
the Atlantic to England. In England the cargo was exchanged for guns and cloth and trinkets—all of which could be used
to buy human beings in Africa. Then the slave ships sailed south from England to Africa to fill their holds with African
men, women, and children—who were the most valuable cargo of all. Those people sailed west—against their wishes—
and were usually taken to a Caribbean island or a southern port where the sea captains sold them for cash or more
sugar. Finally, the crisscrossed triangular journey ended in Massachusetts or New York or Annapolis.

Robert Walsh was an eyewitness of a slave ship in action. He wrote "The slaves were all enclosed under grated
hatchways, between decks. The space was so low they sat between each other's legs ... [and] there was no possibility of
lying down, or at all changing their position, by night or day. Over the hatchway stood a ferocious-looking fellow with a
scourge of many twisted thongs in his hand, who was the slavedriver of the ship.... The last parting sounds we heard
from the unhallowed ship were the cries and shrieks of the slaves, suffering under some bodily affliction.

In Colonial times, there was slavery in both North and South. But slavery didn't make much sense in the North; farms
were small and the farmer could often handle the work himself. The situation was different in the South. The crops that
grew well there—tobacco, cotton, rice, and sugar—demanded large numbers of field workers. But there were few
workers to be had—until the advent of African slavery.

By 1700 tens of thousands of African-born blacks are living in the American South, and the numbers are fast increasing.
In 1705, in Virginia laws are passed that attempt to take away slaves' humanity. The Virginia Black Code says slaves are
property, not people, but property that can think means trouble. So laws are passed to try and prevent thinking. One
North Carolina law read this way "The teaching of slaves has a tendency to excite dissatisfaction in their minds.
Therefore, any free person who shall teach any slave to read and write shall be liable to indictment. If any slave shall
teach, or attempt to teach, any other slave, he or she shall receive thirty-nine lashes on his or her bare back."

When you do something you know is wrong, you usually try to convince yourself that it really is all right. Southerners
begin to say that God created some people to be slaves and some to be masters. They say black people aren't as smart
as white people. Then, to make that true, they pass laws that say it is a crime to teach blacks to read and write. One
white woman in Norfolk, Virginia, who teaches free blacks in her home, is arrested and put in jail. Whites are losing their
freedom too.

According to this section, what distinction is made between the North and the South regarding slavery? Did
slavery exist in both areas? As the number of slaves increased, what did some states do to try to control the
slaves? What rights did slaves have or not have? How were they being treated?
 Segment 3

Abolition! Back in 1765 Americans had shouted the word. Before the Revolution it was the hated British stamp tax the
colonists wanted to abolish. Then the word began to be used with a new meaning. It was the slave trade some wanted
to abolish, and then slavery itself. In 1775 Benjamin Franklin helped found the American Abolition Society. The
Constitution said the slave trade could be officially ended in 1808. When Thomas Jefferson becomes president, he
reminds everyone of that, and a law is passed ending the slave trade. Now, no additional people can be enslaved—at
least not legally. An elated Jefferson said this: "I congratulate you, fellow citizens, on the approach of the period at
which you may interpose your authority constitutionally to withdraw the citizens of the United States from all further
participation in those violations of human rights which have been so long continued on the unoffending inhabitants of
Africa."

But ending the international slave trade doesn't put an end to slavery itself, which continues to grow by natural
increase. And within the South a major internal slave trade develops. Many thinking people—both Northerners and
Southerners—believe slavery is morally wrong. Yet few are willing to do anything about it. Slavery is a profitable way
of life. Those who do speak out—the abolitionists—aren't very popular. Many people argue that if slavery is abolished
it will wreck the Southern economy. James Henry Hammond was one of them. He said, "Do you imagine you could
prevail on us to give up a thousand million dollars in the value of our slaves, and a thousand million more in the value
of our lands?"

The Southern leaders don't seem to understand. Immigrants and ideas and inventions are beginning to change the
North. The South will be left out of much of that excitement. The Frenchman Alexis de Tocqueville visits the United
States and observes a free state and a slave state. He writes about what he sees: "On the north bank of the Ohio,
everything is activity, industry; labor is honored; there are no slaves. Pass to the south bank and the scene changes
so suddenly that you think yourself on the other side of the world; the enterprising spirit is gone."

And yet still, because of the huge importance of cotton, the South remains the wealthiest part of the nation. Both
North and South are jealous of political power. Each wants to dominate the government in Washington. But as long as
Congress is evenly divided between slave states and free states, there is some stability. Then, in 1820, Missouri asks
to enter the Union as a slave state. Northerners are alarmed. If Missouri becomes a state, the North will be outvoted
in Congress. What can be done? Finally, a solution is found. Maine is carved from Massachusetts and made into a
state, a free state. That keeps the balance of free and slave states. At the same time, the territories north of
Missouri's southern border are to remain free. That action is called the Missouri Compromise. It keeps North and
South talking to each other, but just barely. In 1845 slaveowner James Hammond writes this to an abolitionist. He
says: "I repudiate, as ridiculously absurd, that much lauded dogma of Mr. Jefferson that ''all men are born equal.'' No
society has ever yet existed without a natural variety of classes. Slavery is truly the cornerstone and foundation of
every well-designed and durable republican edifice."

Meanwhile, Mr. Hammond and his planter friends are falling out of step with the European world. There, in the first
half of the nineteenth century, most nations outlaw slavery. The Europeans begin to criticize the United States for
allowing it. There are also white Northerners who are increasingly speaking out against slavery. By 1840 there are
said to be about 2,000 abolitionist societies in the North. While some talk of gradually freeing the slaves and even
paying the owners the cash value of their slaves, most abolitionists don't think anyone should be paid for owning
anyone else. They want to end slavery—bam—just like that—and too bad for the slave owners. William Lloyd Garrison,
a white man from Massachusetts, is the founder of the American Anti-Slavery Society and the publisher of the leading
abolitionist newspaper, The Liberator. He says, "I do not wish to think, or speak, or write with moderation. No! Tell a
man whose house is on fire, to give a moderate alarm, but urge me not to use moderation in a cause like the present.
I am in earnest—I will not retreat a single inch—and I WILL BE HEARD."

What is ‘abolition’? What did the abolitionists want to do about slavery in the U.S.? Why? The writer mentions
James Henry Hammond. What is his view of abolition? What important issue does he connect with slavery?
What does he think of Jefferson’s view that ‘all men are created equal’? How does Alexis de Toqueville
describe the U.S.? What does this description illustrate about the differences between the North and the South at
the time of his visit? What problem is exposed by the incorporation of Missouri as a new state? How is the
problem solved?
 Segment 4

The year is 1850. The country is being pulled apart—everyone can see that. Each time a new state enters the Union,
the balance in Congress between North and South is threatened. Now California wants to become a state. California's
constitution prohibits slavery. If California enters the Union, free states will outnumber slave states. South Carolina's
powerful senator John Calhoun says if that happens the South will leave the Union. He declares: "We are not a nation,
but a union, a confederacy of equal and sovereign states. And how can the Union be saved? There is but one way—by
adopting such measures as will satisfy the Southern states."

But Calhoun hasn't convinced the popular senator from Kentucky, Henry Clay, who has been working on another
compromise—the Compromise of 1850 . California is to be admitted to the Union as a free state. A fugitive slave law
will make Northerners return runaway slaves to their owners or face criminal charges . This proposal makes many
Northerners, like abolitionist leader Theodore Parker, very angry. He says : "I will do all in my power to rescue any
fugitive slave from the hands of any officer who attempts to return him to bondage. What is a fine of a thousand
dollars, and jailing for one month, to the liberty of a man?"

Calhoun is still not satisfied. The North must ''cease the agitation on the slave question,'' he says. "And then he adds:
"[If the abolitionists are not silenced] let the states agree to separate."

To avoid secession—which means turning the United States into two nations—even Massachusetts's senator Daniel
Webster agrees to a compromise. He says: "I wish to speak today, not as a Massachusetts man, not as a northern
man, but as an American. I speak today for the preservation of the Union. There can be no such thing as a peaceable
secession. I see it will produce war, and such a war as I will not describe."

When Webster finishes his oration, some people weep. Is it because they know the Union is falling apart? But his
speech helps do what it was meant to do. It helps hold the Union together. Congress votes to accept Henry Clay's
compromise. The real problem is that no one knows how to end slavery and at the same time hold North and South
together.

The petition for California to become a state in 1850 forced some political leaders to compromise. What is the
Compromise of 1850? Who are John Calhoun, Henry Clay, and Daniel Webster? Where is each from and how
did they feel about the Compromise of 1850?
 Segment 5

Senator Stephen A. Douglas of Illinois is known as the "Little Giant." He is just over five feet tall, but so full of energy
he is called a ''steam engine inbreeches.'' He has made his fortune in land speculation and in that new enterprise:
railroads. He can see that railroads are the future and that they will someday stretch from coast to coast. If the
dreamed-of transcontinental railroad takes the route from Chicago to San Francisco, through the Indian territory west
of Missouri, Iowa, and Minnesota, Douglas's property will become even more valuable. And there is a way he can have
his railroad. He can write a bill for Congress that will do away with the Missouri Compromise and open the Indian
territory to slavery. Then he will have the South's votes and his railroad, too.

Douglas's bill divides the western territory into two regions: Kansas and Nebraska (they are much bigger than today's
states). The Missouri Compromise of 1820 is repealed; the ban on slavery is ended. Instead it is left up to the free
residents of each territory to decide whether or not to introduce slavery. It is called "popular sovereignty," but not all
are pleased by it. This is what an Illinois lawyer and politician, renowned for his honesty, has to say: "It is wrong,
wrong in its effect, letting slavery into Kansas and Nebraska-and wrong in principle, allowing it to spread to every
other part of the world, where men can be found inclined to take it."

The Missouri Compromise has kept the peace between North and South for thirty-four years. It is revered by most
Americans. Now it seems clear that Southern slaveowners want to make the whole nation accept slavery. They want
to throw out the compromise. The abolitionists are appalled. A torrent of fiery speeches and sermons denounce the
Kansas-Nebraska Act. Many Northerners who haven't really liked the abolitionists—because they seem
like extremists—now join their ranks. An Illinois lawyer, whose name is Abraham Lincoln, is chosen in 1858 by the
newly formed Republican party to run against Douglas for the U.S. Senate. He says that slavery is more than a moral
problem—the very nation is in danger. And then he delivers these remarkable words: "A house divided against itself
cannot stand. I believe this government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free.... It will become all one
thing, or all the other."

Abraham Lincoln is different from most of those who oppose slavery. He is without malice. He doesn't hate the slave
owners. Human nature being what it is, he says, southern whites are doing what northern whites would do if they
were in their place. That, however, doesn't excuse slavery. He thinks it wrong and says so: "Let us have faith that
right makes might, and in that faith let us, to the end, dare to do our duty as we understand it."

Stephen Douglas is an important man. People pay attention when he speaks. It is a big piece of luck for Lincoln.
Because he is Douglas's opponent, he can't be ignored. Lincoln and Douglas climb on a train and debate at train stops
across Illinois. Douglas talks of popular sovereignty, the right of people to govern themselves. Lincoln goes to the
heart of the matter. He says, "We began by declaring that 'all men are created equal'; but now we have run down to
the other declaration, that for some men to enslave others is a 'sacred right of government.' These principles cannot
stand together."

What was the Kansas-Nebraska Act? What did it aim to do regarding slavery and new states? How was it
different from the Missouri Compromise? How did abolitionists and moderates react to this new law? How did
Stephen Douglas and Abraham Lincoln feel about this new law?
 Segment 6

The Supreme Court has recently added fuel to the abolition fire with a decision that was supposed to douse that fire.
President James Buchanan promised that in his inaugural address on March 4, 1857, he said: "Slavery is a question
that belongs to the Supreme Court of the United States, before whom it is now pending, and will, it is understood, be
speedily and finally settled."

The slavery issue finally settled—how wonderful that would be! The case before the Court deals with a man
named Dred Scott. He has lived in Missouri as a slave. Then he spent several years in Wisconsin, a free territory. Did
that make him free? Scott and others believe it did. Chief Justice Roger Taney gives his opinion, or explanation, of the
case. He writes: "The question before us is, whether [Negroes] ... compose a portion of [the American] people and
are constituent members of this sovereignty? We think they are not.... On the contrary, they [are] ... a subordinate
and inferior class of beings, who [have] been subjugated by the dominant race.... [They] can therefore claim none of
the rights and privileges which [the Constitution] provides for ... citizens of the United States."

Slaves are property, argues Taney, and the Fifth Amendment protects property. Therefore, the Missouri
Compromise—which doesn't respect the slaveowner's property—is unconstitutional. That is the decision that President
Buchanan thinks will settle the slavery question! What it settles is the question of war. It makes it almost certain.
Even a peace-loving man like Frederick Douglass now believes there must be a war. "Those who profess to favor
freedom and yetdeprecate agitation," he says, "are men who want crops without plowing up the ground; they want
rain without thunder and lightning."

They are already fighting in Kansas and Nebraska territories. Slaveowners and abolitionists have attempted to live
together, but it isn't working. As early as 1856 the territory has two governments—one for slavery and one against.
Then a posse of about 800 pro-slavery men head for the free town of Lawrence, Kansas, and destroy it. It is guerrilla
warfare. One of the soldiers in that war in bloody Kansas is a fierce-eyed white abolitionist named John Brown. He
says things like this: "We must fight fire with fire and strike terror in their hearts."

Brown and his followers use axes to murder five pro-slavery settlers. That starts things. Brown burns with religious
fire. He believes he is acting for God. He decides to lead a revolution. He thinks blacks will rise up and follow him. On
a dark night in 1859, he and a few followers capture a government arsenal and armory in the pretty little West
Virginia town of Harper's Ferry, where two rivers come together, slash the hills, and create spectacular scenery. But
Brown isn't interested in the scenery. He needs help and it never comes. He is soon captured—by a military officer
named Robert E. Lee—and given a trial that all the nation follows. He puts on a performance few will forget, and his
words inflame the North: "I deny everything but a design on my part to free slaves. I, John Brown, am now quite
certain that the crimes of this guilty land will never be purged away, but with blood."

He is right. John Brown stuck his head in a noose made of South Carolina cotton. His words will soon haunt both North
and South

What was the Dred Scott case? Who was involved and what decision was made by the Supreme Court? How
did this decision lead to further conflict? Who was John Brown and what actions did he take in his fight against
slavery?
Segment 7

In 1858 Stephen Douglas defeated Abraham Lincoln and became the senator from Illinois. But the tall country lawyer
was now well-known; the Lincoln-Douglas debates have been read across the nation. Now, two years later, when both
men run for the presidency, people are ready for Lincoln's words. In 1860, Abraham Lincoln is elected president of the
United States . Before he even has a chance to take office, seven southern states secede from the Union. Alexander
Stephens is a leading Southern figure . He says : "All efforts to save the Union will be unavailing. The truth is our
leaders and public men do not desire to continue it on any terms."

South Carolina leads the way. Mississippi, one of the richest states in the nation, follows eagerly. So do Florida,
Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, and Texas. The other slave states in the South hesitate until President Lincoln calls for
volunteers to fight the Southerners. That decides it for Virginia, Arkansas, North Carolina, and Tennessee. In all,
eleven states leave the Union and form the Confederate States of America.

In February 1861, the Confederate States elect their own president—Jefferson Davis of Mississippi. ''All we ask is to be
left alone,'' he says at his inauguration.

The abolitionists are screaming for Lincoln to free the slaves. But in his own inaugural address, Lincoln said that
slavery would be left alone in the slave states. The issue is the expansion of slavery in the West . If there is to be a
war, Lincoln knows he needs to hold onto the slave states that border the South—Maryland, Kentucky, Missouri, and
Delaware. He says if he frees the slaves, loses the war, and destroys the Union, he won't help the slaves or anybody
else. But there seems to be no way to stop a war. If the Union is to survive, and be true to its founding principle—that
all men are created equal—people will have to fight for it.

And this is how it begins: Southern guns fire on U.S. troops at a small fort in the harbor at Charleston, South
Carolina. Theodore Upson was a boy who was there. He wrote: "Father and I were husking our corn when William
Corry came across the field. He was excited and said, 'Jonathan, the Rebels have fired upon Fort Sumter.' Father got
white, and couldn't say a word."

Fort Sumter is a United States government fort, and those shots announce that South Carolina is serious about having
left the United States. The South Carolinians do more than fire on the fort. They destroy it. A Charleston eyewitness
describes it this way : "A perfect sheet of flame flashed out, a deafening roar, a rumbling, deadening sound, and the
war was on."

When was Abraham Lincoln elected president? What sequence of events followed his election?
What did the actions of the state of South Carolina signal?