American Civil War Essay Plans
‘To what extent is the rapid growth of the Republicans explained by the
mistakes of other parties/politicians’
Whig mistakes
Supporting the restriction of slavery
• Henry Clay’s (Whig) 1850 Compromise maintained the MC line by preventing slavery in
California and allowing popular sovereignty in New Mexico; Whig President Zachary
Taylor’s urging of California and New Mexico to apply for statehood whilst they were
populated by free-soilers
• Both of these actions alienated the Whigs’ Southern support base, and they lost their
status as a national party, becoming heavily reliant on their Northern support, thus
creating less security
Allowing slavery to become a defining issue in the party
• “The debate over slavery was pushing other issues into the background and exposing the
raw divisions within the party” – Boyer
• By not taking a decisive and unified stance on slavery from the outset – and instead
leaving it to debate – the Whigs allowed for two diverging factions to emerge, thus
dividing the party from within; shown by their disagreement over Fillmore and Scott, and
their inconclusive platform that led to their demise in the 1852 election
• “Of the two parties, the Whigs had a larger, more aggressive free-soil wing, and hence they
were more vulnerable to disruption” – Boyer
• These divisions made the alienation of southern support even more damning, as there
was even less capacity for compromise and unity, further dividing the party from within
• Hence, they couldn’t survive the Kansas-Nebraska Act – 90% of Southerners voted for it
and 64% of Northerners voted against it; “The Kansas-Nebraska Act finished off the Whig
party and gave birth to an new, entirely northern Republican party” – McPherson
Assuming a pro-immigration platform
• In an attempt to suck up to the vast influx of immigrants (3m, and 1m Irish Catholics), the
Whigs assumed a pro-immigration and pro-Catholic platform
• This backfired badly, as the immigrants voted Democrat – importantly, the Whigs now
completely alienated their Northern – Protestant – support base, creating a vacuum for
a new northern party to emerge
Evaluation:
• The rise of the Republicans can’t solely be attributed to the weaknesses and
mistakes of the Whigs, as the Republicans themselves were a stronger, and more
unified party, especially considering they were born directly out of the KN Act on an
abolitionist platform – their unity meant that regardless of the American or Whig party’s
mistakes, the Republicans would become the pre-eminent northern party, to the extent they
captured the Northern vote in 1856 with 100 seats in the House
• The growing sectionalisation was the natural course of politics, and was out of the
Whigs hands; it was likely they would have internally sectionalised anyway, the KN Act just
hastened this
Democrat aggression in expanding slavery
The Democrats’ increasing desire to expand slavery in the 1840s and 50s inflamed Northern
paranoia and anger towards slavery, as now, it was a direct threat to their own free-labour
institutions – “Northerners worried that the westward expansion of slavery would check the
westward migration of free labour” (Boyer)
‘To what extent is the rapid growth of the Republicans explained by the
mistakes of other parties/politicians’
Whig mistakes
Supporting the restriction of slavery
• Henry Clay’s (Whig) 1850 Compromise maintained the MC line by preventing slavery in
California and allowing popular sovereignty in New Mexico; Whig President Zachary
Taylor’s urging of California and New Mexico to apply for statehood whilst they were
populated by free-soilers
• Both of these actions alienated the Whigs’ Southern support base, and they lost their
status as a national party, becoming heavily reliant on their Northern support, thus
creating less security
Allowing slavery to become a defining issue in the party
• “The debate over slavery was pushing other issues into the background and exposing the
raw divisions within the party” – Boyer
• By not taking a decisive and unified stance on slavery from the outset – and instead
leaving it to debate – the Whigs allowed for two diverging factions to emerge, thus
dividing the party from within; shown by their disagreement over Fillmore and Scott, and
their inconclusive platform that led to their demise in the 1852 election
• “Of the two parties, the Whigs had a larger, more aggressive free-soil wing, and hence they
were more vulnerable to disruption” – Boyer
• These divisions made the alienation of southern support even more damning, as there
was even less capacity for compromise and unity, further dividing the party from within
• Hence, they couldn’t survive the Kansas-Nebraska Act – 90% of Southerners voted for it
and 64% of Northerners voted against it; “The Kansas-Nebraska Act finished off the Whig
party and gave birth to an new, entirely northern Republican party” – McPherson
Assuming a pro-immigration platform
• In an attempt to suck up to the vast influx of immigrants (3m, and 1m Irish Catholics), the
Whigs assumed a pro-immigration and pro-Catholic platform
• This backfired badly, as the immigrants voted Democrat – importantly, the Whigs now
completely alienated their Northern – Protestant – support base, creating a vacuum for
a new northern party to emerge
Evaluation:
• The rise of the Republicans can’t solely be attributed to the weaknesses and
mistakes of the Whigs, as the Republicans themselves were a stronger, and more
unified party, especially considering they were born directly out of the KN Act on an
abolitionist platform – their unity meant that regardless of the American or Whig party’s
mistakes, the Republicans would become the pre-eminent northern party, to the extent they
captured the Northern vote in 1856 with 100 seats in the House
• The growing sectionalisation was the natural course of politics, and was out of the
Whigs hands; it was likely they would have internally sectionalised anyway, the KN Act just
hastened this
Democrat aggression in expanding slavery
The Democrats’ increasing desire to expand slavery in the 1840s and 50s inflamed Northern
paranoia and anger towards slavery, as now, it was a direct threat to their own free-labour
institutions – “Northerners worried that the westward expansion of slavery would check the
westward migration of free labour” (Boyer)
