The Election of 1860 and Secession<\/h2>\r\nThe 1860 presidential election was chaotic. In April, the Democratic Party convened in Charleston, South Carolina, the bastion of secessionist thought in the South. The goal was to nominate a candidate for the party ticket, but the party was deeply divided. Northern Democrats pulled for Senator Stephen Douglas, a pro-slavery moderate championing popular sovereignty, while southern Democrats were intent on endorsing someone other than Douglas. The parties leaders\u2019 refusal to include a pro-slavery platform resulted in southern delegates walking out of the convention, preventing Douglas from gaining the two-thirds majority required for a nomination. The Democrats ended up with two presidential candidates. A subsequent convention in Baltimore nominated Douglas, while southerners nominated the current vice president, John C. Breckinridge of Kentucky, as their presidential candidate. The nation\u2019s oldest party had split over differences in policy toward slavery.1<\/sup><\/a>\r\n\r\nInitially, the Republicans were hardly unified around a single candidate themselves. Several leading Republican men vied for their party\u2019s nomination. A consensus emerged at the May 1860 convention that the party\u2019s nominee would need to carry all the free states\u2014for only in that situation could a Republican nominee potentially win. New York Senator William Seward, a leading contender, was passed over. Seward\u2019s pro-immigrant position posed a potential obstacle, particularly in Pennsylvania and New Jersey. Abraham Lincoln of Illinois, as a relatively unknown but likable politician, rose from a pool of potential candidates and was selected by the delegates on the third ballot. The electoral landscape was further complicated through the emergence of a fourth candidate, Tennessee\u2019s John Bell, heading the Constitutional Union Party. The Constitutional Unionists, composed of former Whigs who teamed up with some southern Democrats, made it their mission to avoid the specter of secession while doing little else to address the issues tearing the country apart.\r\n\r\nAbraham Lincoln\u2019s nomination proved a great windfall for the Republican Party. Lincoln carried all free states with the exception of New Jersey (which he split with Douglas). Of the voting electorate, 81.2 percent came out to vote\u2014at that point the highest ever for a presidential election. Lincoln received less than 40 percent of the popular vote, but with the field so split, that percentage yielded 180 electoral votes. Lincoln was trailed by Breckinridge with his 72 electoral votes, carrying eleven of the fifteen slave states; Bell came in third with 39 electoral votes; and Douglas came in last, only able to garner 12 electoral votes despite carrying almost 30 percent of the popular vote. Since the Republican platform prohibited the expansion of slavery in future western states, all future Confederate states, with the exception of Virginia, excluded Lincoln\u2019s name from their ballots.2<\/sup><\/a>\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n[caption id=\"\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"700\"]![\"Photograph](\"http:\/\/media.ccconline.org\/ccco\/2019Master\/HIS121\/eText\/Sections\/Section5\/..\/..\/Images\/Lincoln.jpg#fixme\")
Abraham Lincoln, August 13, 1860. \u202fLibrary of Congress<\/a>.[\/caption]\r\n\r\nThe election of Lincoln and the perceived threat to the institution of slavery proved too much for the deep southern states. South Carolina acted almost immediately, calling a convention to declare secession. On December 20, 1860, the South Carolina convention voted unanimously 169\u20130 to dissolve their union with the United States.3<\/sup><\/a> The other states across the Deep South quickly followed suit. Mississippi adopted their own resolution on January 9, 1861, Florida followed on January 10, Alabama on January 11, Georgia on January 19, Louisiana on January 26, and Texas on February 1. Texas was the only state to put the issue up for a popular vote, but secession was widely popular throughout the South.\r\n\r\nConfederates quickly shed their American identity and adopted a new Confederate nationalism. Confederate nationalism was based on several ideals, foremost among these being slavery. As Confederate vice president Alexander Stephens stated, the Confederacy\u2019s \u201cfoundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery . . . is his natural and normal condition.\u201d4<\/sup><\/a> The election of Lincoln in 1860 demonstrated that the South was politically overwhelmed. Slavery was omnipresent in the prewar South, and it served as the most common frame of reference for unequal power. To a southern man, there was no fate more terrifying than the thought of being reduced to the level of a slave. Religion likewise shaped Confederate nationalism, as southerners believed that the Confederacy was fulfilling God\u2019s will. The Confederacy even veered from the American constitution by explicitly invoking Christianity in their founding document. Yet in every case, all rationale for secession could be thoroughly tied to slavery. \u201cOur position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery\u2014the greatest material interest of the world,\u201d proclaimed the Mississippi statement of secession.5<\/sup><\/a> Thus for the original seven Confederate states (and the four that would subsequently join), slavery\u2019s existence was the essential core of the fledging Confederacy.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n[caption id=\"\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"700\"]![\"A](\"http:\/\/media.ccconline.org\/ccco\/2019Master\/HIS121\/eText\/Sections\/Section5\/..\/..\/Images\/Confederate_5_and_100_Dollars.jpg#fixme\")
The emblems of nationalism on this currency reveal much about the ideology underpinning the Confederacy: George Washington standing stately in a Roman toga indicates the belief in the South\u2019s honorable and aristocratic past; John C. Calhoun\u2019s portrait emphasizes the Confederate argument of the importance of states\u2019 rights; and, most importantly, the image of African Americans working in fields demonstrates slavery\u2019s position as foundational to the Confederacy. A five and one hundred dollar Confederate States of America interest bearing banknote, c. 1861 and 1862. \u202fWikimedia.<\/a>[\/caption]\r\n\r\nNot all southerners participated in Confederate nationalism. Unionist southerners, most common in the upcountry where slavery was weakest, retained their loyalty to the Union. These southerners joined the Union army, that is, the army of the United States of America, and worked to defeat the Confederacy.6<\/sup><\/a> Black southerners, most of whom were slaves, overwhelmingly supported the Union, often running away from plantations and forcing the Union army to reckon with slavery.7<\/sup><\/a>\r\n\r\nPresident James Buchanan would not directly address the issue of secession prior to his term\u2019s end in early March. Any effort to try to solve the issue therefore fell upon Congress, specifically a Committee of Thirteen including prominent men such as Stephen Douglas, William Seward, Robert Toombs, and John Crittenden. In what became known as \u201cCrittenden\u2019s Compromise,\u201d Senator Crittenden proposed a series of Constitutional amendments that guaranteed slavery in southern states and territories, denied the federal government interstate slave trade regulatory power, and offered to compensate owners of unrecovered fugitive slaves. The Committee of Thirteen ultimately voted down the measure, and it likewise failed in the full Senate vote (25\u201323). Reconciliation appeared impossible.8<\/sup><\/a>\r\n\r\nThe seven seceding states met in Montgomery, Alabama on February 4 to organize a new nation. The delegates selected Jefferson Davis of Mississippi as president and established a capital in Montgomery, Alabama (it would move to Richmond in May). Whether other states of the Upper South would join the Confederacy remained uncertain. By the early spring of 1861, North Carolina and Tennessee had not held secession conventions, while voters in Virginia, Missouri, and Arkansas initially voted down secession. Despite this temporary boost to the Union, it became abundantly clear that these acts of loyalty in the Upper South were highly conditional and relied on a clear lack of intervention on the part of the federal government. This was the precarious political situation facing Abraham Lincoln following his inauguration on March 4, 1861.\r\nNotes<\/h4>\r\n\r\n \t- Proceedings of the Conventions at Charleston and Baltimore: Published by Order of the National Democratic Convention<\/em> (Washington, DC: n.p., 1860).
![\"image\"](\"http:\/\/media.ccconline.org\/ccco\/2019Master\/HIS121\/eText\/Sections\/Section5\/..\/..\/Images\/redirect.png#fixme\")
<\/a><\/li>\r\n \t- William J. Cooper, We Have the War upon Us: The Onset of the Civil War, November 1860\u2013April 1861<\/em> (New York: Knopf, 2012), 14. <\/a><\/li>\r\n \t
- \u201cA Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union,\u201d December 22, 1860, Avalon Project at the Yale Law School<\/em>, http:\/\/avalon.law.yale.edu\/19th_century\/csa_scarsec.asp, accessed August 1, 2015. <\/a><\/li>\r\n \t
- Alexander Stephens, speech in Savannah, Georgia, delivered March 21, 1861, quoted in Henry Cleveland, Alexander Stephens, in Public and Private. With Letters and Speeches Before, During and Since the War<\/em> (Philadelphia: National, 1866), 719. <\/a><\/li>\r\n \t
- \u201cDeclaration of the Immediate Causes.\u201d <\/a><\/li>\r\n \t
- See Jon L. Wakelyn, ed., Southern Unionist Pamphlets and the Civil War<\/em> (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1999). <\/a><\/li>\r\n \t
- Steven Hahn, The Political Worlds of Slavery and Freedom<\/em> (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2009), 55\u2013114. <\/a><\/li>\r\n \t
- Horace Greeley, The American Conflict: A History of the Great Rebellion in the United States of America, 1860\u20131864, Volume 1<\/em> (Hartford, CT: Case, Lockwood, 1864), 366\u2013367. <\/a><\/li>\r\n<\/ol>\r\n<\/div>","rendered":"
![\"\u201cThe](\"http:\/\/media.ccconline.org\/ccco\/2019Master\/HIS121\/eText\/Sections\/Section5\/..\/..\/Images\/The_seceding_South_Carolina_delegation.jpg#fixme\" "\\"Title:")
\u201cThe Seceding South Carolina Delegation.\u201d Harper\u2019s Weekly. December 22, 1860. \u202fWikimedia Commons<\/a>.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\nThe Compromise of 1850 preserved the nation, but did nothing to end the growing sectional antagonism. The Kansas-Nebraska Act outraged millions, helped split the Democratic Party, and prompted the creation of a new, sectional party \u2013 the Republican Party \u2013 to coalesce almost overnight from various other political groups. In Kansas violence foreshadowed the Civil War.<\/p>\n
Violence had even occurred on the Senate floor in the Brooks-Sumner incident. The Supreme Court\u2019s Dred Scott<\/em> decision, the contentious Lincoln-Douglas debates, and John Brown\u2019s raid on Harper\u2019s Ferry exacerbated the growing crisis. Institutions of all sorts split down the middle over the question of slavery. By 1859, there was open talk of secession throughout the South if a Republican should be elected president in 1860.<\/p>\nThe Election of 1860 and Secession<\/h2>\n
The 1860 presidential election was chaotic. In April, the Democratic Party convened in Charleston, South Carolina, the bastion of secessionist thought in the South. The goal was to nominate a candidate for the party ticket, but the party was deeply divided. Northern Democrats pulled for Senator Stephen Douglas, a pro-slavery moderate championing popular sovereignty, while southern Democrats were intent on endorsing someone other than Douglas. The parties leaders\u2019 refusal to include a pro-slavery platform resulted in southern delegates walking out of the convention, preventing Douglas from gaining the two-thirds majority required for a nomination. The Democrats ended up with two presidential candidates. A subsequent convention in Baltimore nominated Douglas, while southerners nominated the current vice president, John C. Breckinridge of Kentucky, as their presidential candidate. The nation\u2019s oldest party had split over differences in policy toward slavery.1<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\nInitially, the Republicans were hardly unified around a single candidate themselves. Several leading Republican men vied for their party\u2019s nomination. A consensus emerged at the May 1860 convention that the party\u2019s nominee would need to carry all the free states\u2014for only in that situation could a Republican nominee potentially win. New York Senator William Seward, a leading contender, was passed over. Seward\u2019s pro-immigrant position posed a potential obstacle, particularly in Pennsylvania and New Jersey. Abraham Lincoln of Illinois, as a relatively unknown but likable politician, rose from a pool of potential candidates and was selected by the delegates on the third ballot. The electoral landscape was further complicated through the emergence of a fourth candidate, Tennessee\u2019s John Bell, heading the Constitutional Union Party. The Constitutional Unionists, composed of former Whigs who teamed up with some southern Democrats, made it their mission to avoid the specter of secession while doing little else to address the issues tearing the country apart.<\/p>\n
Abraham Lincoln\u2019s nomination proved a great windfall for the Republican Party. Lincoln carried all free states with the exception of New Jersey (which he split with Douglas). Of the voting electorate, 81.2 percent came out to vote\u2014at that point the highest ever for a presidential election. Lincoln received less than 40 percent of the popular vote, but with the field so split, that percentage yielded 180 electoral votes. Lincoln was trailed by Breckinridge with his 72 electoral votes, carrying eleven of the fifteen slave states; Bell came in third with 39 electoral votes; and Douglas came in last, only able to garner 12 electoral votes despite carrying almost 30 percent of the popular vote. Since the Republican platform prohibited the expansion of slavery in future western states, all future Confederate states, with the exception of Virginia, excluded Lincoln\u2019s name from their ballots.2<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\nAbraham Lincoln, August 13, 1860. \u202fLibrary of Congress<\/a>.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\nThe election of Lincoln and the perceived threat to the institution of slavery proved too much for the deep southern states. South Carolina acted almost immediately, calling a convention to declare secession. On December 20, 1860, the South Carolina convention voted unanimously 169\u20130 to dissolve their union with the United States.3<\/sup><\/a> The other states across the Deep South quickly followed suit. Mississippi adopted their own resolution on January 9, 1861, Florida followed on January 10, Alabama on January 11, Georgia on January 19, Louisiana on January 26, and Texas on February 1. Texas was the only state to put the issue up for a popular vote, but secession was widely popular throughout the South.<\/p>\nConfederates quickly shed their American identity and adopted a new Confederate nationalism. Confederate nationalism was based on several ideals, foremost among these being slavery. As Confederate vice president Alexander Stephens stated, the Confederacy\u2019s \u201cfoundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery . . . is his natural and normal condition.\u201d4<\/sup><\/a> The election of Lincoln in 1860 demonstrated that the South was politically overwhelmed. Slavery was omnipresent in the prewar South, and it served as the most common frame of reference for unequal power. To a southern man, there was no fate more terrifying than the thought of being reduced to the level of a slave. Religion likewise shaped Confederate nationalism, as southerners believed that the Confederacy was fulfilling God\u2019s will. The Confederacy even veered from the American constitution by explicitly invoking Christianity in their founding document. Yet in every case, all rationale for secession could be thoroughly tied to slavery. \u201cOur position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery\u2014the greatest material interest of the world,\u201d proclaimed the Mississippi statement of secession.5<\/sup><\/a> Thus for the original seven Confederate states (and the four that would subsequently join), slavery\u2019s existence was the essential core of the fledging Confederacy.<\/p>\n <\/p>\nThe emblems of nationalism on this currency reveal much about the ideology underpinning the Confederacy: George Washington standing stately in a Roman toga indicates the belief in the South\u2019s honorable and aristocratic past; John C. Calhoun\u2019s portrait emphasizes the Confederate argument of the importance of states\u2019 rights; and, most importantly, the image of African Americans working in fields demonstrates slavery\u2019s position as foundational to the Confederacy. A five and one hundred dollar Confederate States of America interest bearing banknote, c. 1861 and 1862. \u202fWikimedia.<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\nNot all southerners participated in Confederate nationalism. Unionist southerners, most common in the upcountry where slavery was weakest, retained their loyalty to the Union. These southerners joined the Union army, that is, the army of the United States of America, and worked to defeat the Confederacy.6<\/sup><\/a> Black southerners, most of whom were slaves, overwhelmingly supported the Union, often running away from plantations and forcing the Union army to reckon with slavery.7<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\nPresident James Buchanan would not directly address the issue of secession prior to his term\u2019s end in early March. Any effort to try to solve the issue therefore fell upon Congress, specifically a Committee of Thirteen including prominent men such as Stephen Douglas, William Seward, Robert Toombs, and John Crittenden. In what became known as \u201cCrittenden\u2019s Compromise,\u201d Senator Crittenden proposed a series of Constitutional amendments that guaranteed slavery in southern states and territories, denied the federal government interstate slave trade regulatory power, and offered to compensate owners of unrecovered fugitive slaves. The Committee of Thirteen ultimately voted down the measure, and it likewise failed in the full Senate vote (25\u201323). Reconciliation appeared impossible.8<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\nThe seven seceding states met in Montgomery, Alabama on February 4 to organize a new nation. The delegates selected Jefferson Davis of Mississippi as president and established a capital in Montgomery, Alabama (it would move to Richmond in May). Whether other states of the Upper South would join the Confederacy remained uncertain. By the early spring of 1861, North Carolina and Tennessee had not held secession conventions, while voters in Virginia, Missouri, and Arkansas initially voted down secession. Despite this temporary boost to the Union, it became abundantly clear that these acts of loyalty in the Upper South were highly conditional and relied on a clear lack of intervention on the part of the federal government. This was the precarious political situation facing Abraham Lincoln following his inauguration on March 4, 1861.<\/p>\n
Notes<\/h4>\n\n- Proceedings of the Conventions at Charleston and Baltimore: Published by Order of the National Democratic Convention<\/em> (Washington, DC: n.p., 1860). <\/a><\/li>\n
- William J. Cooper, We Have the War upon Us: The Onset of the Civil War, November 1860\u2013April 1861<\/em> (New York: Knopf, 2012), 14. <\/a><\/li>\n
- \u201cA Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union,\u201d December 22, 1860, Avalon Project at the Yale Law School<\/em>, http:\/\/avalon.law.yale.edu\/19th_century\/csa_scarsec.asp, accessed August 1, 2015. <\/a><\/li>\n
- Alexander Stephens, speech in Savannah, Georgia, delivered March 21, 1861, quoted in Henry Cleveland, Alexander Stephens, in Public and Private. With Letters and Speeches Before, During and Since the War<\/em> (Philadelphia: National, 1866), 719. <\/a><\/li>\n
- \u201cDeclaration of the Immediate Causes.\u201d <\/a><\/li>\n
- See Jon L. Wakelyn, ed., Southern Unionist Pamphlets and the Civil War<\/em> (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1999). <\/a><\/li>\n
- Steven Hahn, The Political Worlds of Slavery and Freedom<\/em> (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2009), 55\u2013114. <\/a><\/li>\n
- Horace Greeley, The American Conflict: A History of the Great Rebellion in the United States of America, 1860\u20131864, Volume 1<\/em> (Hartford, CT: Case, Lockwood, 1864), 366\u2013367. <\/a><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":101,"menu_order":48,"template":"","meta":{"pb_show_title":"on","pb_short_title":"","pb_subtitle":"","pb_authors":[],"pb_section_license":""},"chapter-type":[],"contributor":[],"license":[],"class_list":["post-142","chapter","type-chapter","status-publish","hentry"],"part":252,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschis1210\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/142","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschis1210\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschis1210\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/chapter"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschis1210\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/101"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschis1210\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/142\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":481,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschis1210\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/142\/revisions\/481"}],"part":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschis1210\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/parts\/252"}],"metadata":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschis1210\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/142\/metadata\/"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschis1210\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=142"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"chapter-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschis1210\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapter-type?post=142"},{"taxonomy":"contributor","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschis1210\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/contributor?post=142"},{"taxonomy":"license","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschis1210\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/license?post=142"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
![\"Photograph](\"https:\/\/commons.wikimedia.org\/wiki\/File:The_seceding_South_Carolina_delegation_(Boston_Public_Library).jpg\")
Abraham Lincoln, August 13, 1860. \u202f![Wikimedia.<\/a>[\/caption]\r\n\r\nNot all southerners participated in Confederate nationalism. Unionist southerners, most common in the upcountry where slavery was weakest, retained their loyalty to the Union. These southerners joined the Union army, that is, the army of the United States of America, and worked to defeat the Confederacy.](\"http:\/\/commons.wikimedia.org\/wiki\/File:Confederate_5_and_100_Dollars.jpg\"){kind=link}
- \r\n \t
- Proceedings of the Conventions at Charleston and Baltimore: Published by Order of the National Democratic Convention<\/em> (Washington, DC: n.p., 1860). <\/a><\/li>\r\n \t
- William J. Cooper, We Have the War upon Us: The Onset of the Civil War, November 1860\u2013April 1861<\/em> (New York: Knopf, 2012), 14.
<\/a><\/li>\r\n \t- \u201cA Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union,\u201d December 22, 1860, Avalon Project at the Yale Law School<\/em>, http:\/\/avalon.law.yale.edu\/19th_century\/csa_scarsec.asp, accessed August 1, 2015.
<\/a><\/li>\r\n \t- Alexander Stephens, speech in Savannah, Georgia, delivered March 21, 1861, quoted in Henry Cleveland, Alexander Stephens, in Public and Private. With Letters and Speeches Before, During and Since the War<\/em> (Philadelphia: National, 1866), 719.
<\/a><\/li>\r\n \t- \u201cDeclaration of the Immediate Causes.\u201d
<\/a><\/li>\r\n \t- See Jon L. Wakelyn, ed., Southern Unionist Pamphlets and the Civil War<\/em> (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1999).
<\/a><\/li>\r\n \t- Steven Hahn, The Political Worlds of Slavery and Freedom<\/em> (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2009), 55\u2013114.
<\/a><\/li>\r\n \t- Horace Greeley, The American Conflict: A History of the Great Rebellion in the United States of America, 1860\u20131864, Volume 1<\/em> (Hartford, CT: Case, Lockwood, 1864), 366\u2013367.
<\/a><\/li>\r\n<\/ol>\r\n<\/div>","rendered":"\u201cThe Seceding South Carolina Delegation.\u201d Harper\u2019s Weekly. December 22, 1860. \u202fWikimedia Commons<\/a>.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n \nThe Compromise of 1850 preserved the nation, but did nothing to end the growing sectional antagonism. The Kansas-Nebraska Act outraged millions, helped split the Democratic Party, and prompted the creation of a new, sectional party \u2013 the Republican Party \u2013 to coalesce almost overnight from various other political groups. In Kansas violence foreshadowed the Civil War.<\/p>\n
Violence had even occurred on the Senate floor in the Brooks-Sumner incident. The Supreme Court\u2019s Dred Scott<\/em> decision, the contentious Lincoln-Douglas debates, and John Brown\u2019s raid on Harper\u2019s Ferry exacerbated the growing crisis. Institutions of all sorts split down the middle over the question of slavery. By 1859, there was open talk of secession throughout the South if a Republican should be elected president in 1860.<\/p>\n
The Election of 1860 and Secession<\/h2>\n
The 1860 presidential election was chaotic. In April, the Democratic Party convened in Charleston, South Carolina, the bastion of secessionist thought in the South. The goal was to nominate a candidate for the party ticket, but the party was deeply divided. Northern Democrats pulled for Senator Stephen Douglas, a pro-slavery moderate championing popular sovereignty, while southern Democrats were intent on endorsing someone other than Douglas. The parties leaders\u2019 refusal to include a pro-slavery platform resulted in southern delegates walking out of the convention, preventing Douglas from gaining the two-thirds majority required for a nomination. The Democrats ended up with two presidential candidates. A subsequent convention in Baltimore nominated Douglas, while southerners nominated the current vice president, John C. Breckinridge of Kentucky, as their presidential candidate. The nation\u2019s oldest party had split over differences in policy toward slavery.1<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n
Initially, the Republicans were hardly unified around a single candidate themselves. Several leading Republican men vied for their party\u2019s nomination. A consensus emerged at the May 1860 convention that the party\u2019s nominee would need to carry all the free states\u2014for only in that situation could a Republican nominee potentially win. New York Senator William Seward, a leading contender, was passed over. Seward\u2019s pro-immigrant position posed a potential obstacle, particularly in Pennsylvania and New Jersey. Abraham Lincoln of Illinois, as a relatively unknown but likable politician, rose from a pool of potential candidates and was selected by the delegates on the third ballot. The electoral landscape was further complicated through the emergence of a fourth candidate, Tennessee\u2019s John Bell, heading the Constitutional Union Party. The Constitutional Unionists, composed of former Whigs who teamed up with some southern Democrats, made it their mission to avoid the specter of secession while doing little else to address the issues tearing the country apart.<\/p>\n
Abraham Lincoln\u2019s nomination proved a great windfall for the Republican Party. Lincoln carried all free states with the exception of New Jersey (which he split with Douglas). Of the voting electorate, 81.2 percent came out to vote\u2014at that point the highest ever for a presidential election. Lincoln received less than 40 percent of the popular vote, but with the field so split, that percentage yielded 180 electoral votes. Lincoln was trailed by Breckinridge with his 72 electoral votes, carrying eleven of the fifteen slave states; Bell came in third with 39 electoral votes; and Douglas came in last, only able to garner 12 electoral votes despite carrying almost 30 percent of the popular vote. Since the Republican platform prohibited the expansion of slavery in future western states, all future Confederate states, with the exception of Virginia, excluded Lincoln\u2019s name from their ballots.2<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Abraham Lincoln, August 13, 1860. \u202fLibrary of Congress<\/a>.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n The election of Lincoln and the perceived threat to the institution of slavery proved too much for the deep southern states. South Carolina acted almost immediately, calling a convention to declare secession. On December 20, 1860, the South Carolina convention voted unanimously 169\u20130 to dissolve their union with the United States.3<\/sup><\/a> The other states across the Deep South quickly followed suit. Mississippi adopted their own resolution on January 9, 1861, Florida followed on January 10, Alabama on January 11, Georgia on January 19, Louisiana on January 26, and Texas on February 1. Texas was the only state to put the issue up for a popular vote, but secession was widely popular throughout the South.<\/p>\n
Confederates quickly shed their American identity and adopted a new Confederate nationalism. Confederate nationalism was based on several ideals, foremost among these being slavery. As Confederate vice president Alexander Stephens stated, the Confederacy\u2019s \u201cfoundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery . . . is his natural and normal condition.\u201d4<\/sup><\/a> The election of Lincoln in 1860 demonstrated that the South was politically overwhelmed. Slavery was omnipresent in the prewar South, and it served as the most common frame of reference for unequal power. To a southern man, there was no fate more terrifying than the thought of being reduced to the level of a slave. Religion likewise shaped Confederate nationalism, as southerners believed that the Confederacy was fulfilling God\u2019s will. The Confederacy even veered from the American constitution by explicitly invoking Christianity in their founding document. Yet in every case, all rationale for secession could be thoroughly tied to slavery. \u201cOur position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery\u2014the greatest material interest of the world,\u201d proclaimed the Mississippi statement of secession.5<\/sup><\/a> Thus for the original seven Confederate states (and the four that would subsequently join), slavery\u2019s existence was the essential core of the fledging Confederacy.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The emblems of nationalism on this currency reveal much about the ideology underpinning the Confederacy: George Washington standing stately in a Roman toga indicates the belief in the South\u2019s honorable and aristocratic past; John C. Calhoun\u2019s portrait emphasizes the Confederate argument of the importance of states\u2019 rights; and, most importantly, the image of African Americans working in fields demonstrates slavery\u2019s position as foundational to the Confederacy. A five and one hundred dollar Confederate States of America interest bearing banknote, c. 1861 and 1862. \u202fWikimedia.<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n Not all southerners participated in Confederate nationalism. Unionist southerners, most common in the upcountry where slavery was weakest, retained their loyalty to the Union. These southerners joined the Union army, that is, the army of the United States of America, and worked to defeat the Confederacy.6<\/sup><\/a> Black southerners, most of whom were slaves, overwhelmingly supported the Union, often running away from plantations and forcing the Union army to reckon with slavery.7<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n
President James Buchanan would not directly address the issue of secession prior to his term\u2019s end in early March. Any effort to try to solve the issue therefore fell upon Congress, specifically a Committee of Thirteen including prominent men such as Stephen Douglas, William Seward, Robert Toombs, and John Crittenden. In what became known as \u201cCrittenden\u2019s Compromise,\u201d Senator Crittenden proposed a series of Constitutional amendments that guaranteed slavery in southern states and territories, denied the federal government interstate slave trade regulatory power, and offered to compensate owners of unrecovered fugitive slaves. The Committee of Thirteen ultimately voted down the measure, and it likewise failed in the full Senate vote (25\u201323). Reconciliation appeared impossible.8<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n
The seven seceding states met in Montgomery, Alabama on February 4 to organize a new nation. The delegates selected Jefferson Davis of Mississippi as president and established a capital in Montgomery, Alabama (it would move to Richmond in May). Whether other states of the Upper South would join the Confederacy remained uncertain. By the early spring of 1861, North Carolina and Tennessee had not held secession conventions, while voters in Virginia, Missouri, and Arkansas initially voted down secession. Despite this temporary boost to the Union, it became abundantly clear that these acts of loyalty in the Upper South were highly conditional and relied on a clear lack of intervention on the part of the federal government. This was the precarious political situation facing Abraham Lincoln following his inauguration on March 4, 1861.<\/p>\n
Notes<\/h4>\n
- \n
- Proceedings of the Conventions at Charleston and Baltimore: Published by Order of the National Democratic Convention<\/em> (Washington, DC: n.p., 1860). <\/a><\/li>\n
- William J. Cooper, We Have the War upon Us: The Onset of the Civil War, November 1860\u2013April 1861<\/em> (New York: Knopf, 2012), 14.
<\/a><\/li>\n- \u201cA Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union,\u201d December 22, 1860, Avalon Project at the Yale Law School<\/em>, http:\/\/avalon.law.yale.edu\/19th_century\/csa_scarsec.asp, accessed August 1, 2015.
<\/a><\/li>\n- Alexander Stephens, speech in Savannah, Georgia, delivered March 21, 1861, quoted in Henry Cleveland, Alexander Stephens, in Public and Private. With Letters and Speeches Before, During and Since the War<\/em> (Philadelphia: National, 1866), 719.
<\/a><\/li>\n- \u201cDeclaration of the Immediate Causes.\u201d
<\/a><\/li>\n- See Jon L. Wakelyn, ed., Southern Unionist Pamphlets and the Civil War<\/em> (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1999).
<\/a><\/li>\n- Steven Hahn, The Political Worlds of Slavery and Freedom<\/em> (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2009), 55\u2013114.
<\/a><\/li>\n- Horace Greeley, The American Conflict: A History of the Great Rebellion in the United States of America, 1860\u20131864, Volume 1<\/em> (Hartford, CT: Case, Lockwood, 1864), 366\u2013367.
<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":101,"menu_order":48,"template":"","meta":{"pb_show_title":"on","pb_short_title":"","pb_subtitle":"","pb_authors":[],"pb_section_license":""},"chapter-type":[],"contributor":[],"license":[],"class_list":["post-142","chapter","type-chapter","status-publish","hentry"],"part":252,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschis1210\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/142","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschis1210\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschis1210\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/chapter"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschis1210\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/101"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschis1210\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/142\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":481,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschis1210\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/142\/revisions\/481"}],"part":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschis1210\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/parts\/252"}],"metadata":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschis1210\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/142\/metadata\/"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschis1210\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=142"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"chapter-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschis1210\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapter-type?post=142"},{"taxonomy":"contributor","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschis1210\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/contributor?post=142"},{"taxonomy":"license","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschis1210\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/license?post=142"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}} - William J. Cooper, We Have the War upon Us: The Onset of the Civil War, November 1860\u2013April 1861<\/em> (New York: Knopf, 2012), 14.
- William J. Cooper, We Have the War upon Us: The Onset of the Civil War, November 1860\u2013April 1861<\/em> (New York: Knopf, 2012), 14.