Ordeal By Fire - Ch. 5

I had always considered the belief that slavery would "die out" eventually and the idea that slavery was not "suited" to existence in the territories of the West and Southwest to be spurious ones.  Though I had never truly considered the possibility of slavery existing "anywhere" other than in the South.  Thus, I was surprised to learn about the serious consideration of the possible use of slaves in the mining operations of California and the extreme suitability of slavery to this occupation.  It was even spoken about openly, such as this statement taken from the Charleston Mercury:

"There is no vocation in the world in which slavery can be more useful and profitable than in mining."
(McPherson, 80)

However, I really shouldn't have been surprised all that much considering how hard the South worked towards acquiring more slave-owning states for their little political confederation.  Because really, deep down, it was all about politics.  Southerners wanted to control the Federal government (ironic considering the fact that they allegedly went to war for "states rights") and to do that they needed as many slave states as possible, each with as large a population as possible.  Only other states where slavery was legal could be counted on to support the legislation that the shakers and movers within the Southern community desired. 

Also, there was a great deal of desire (not only in the South, but also in the North as well) for the US to acquire more land.  Cuba was the one territory that both sides usually agreed on.  Acquiring new territories to the north was not possible, due to Great Britain's strong hold there, so it was to the South (in particular Mexico and Central America) that the US was compelled to look for new lands.  Unfortunately, any territories thus gained, would have been guaranteed to become new slave states, under the regulations dictated by Missouri Compromise.  Such a situation was vehemently opposed by Northern (particularly anti-slavery and abolitionist factions) mostly due to the increased power over federal matters it would give to the South (who already had too much power as it is).  For the anti-slavery contingent, giving slavery new territories to expand into, would allow it the space it needed to grow and flourish, thereby preventing its extinction.  Though the South never acquired Cuba (it would take a later war with Spain to win the US the dubious distinction of "owning" Cuba) or made any inroads into Mexico and Central America, these very publicly discussed aspirations helped to convince me that the South never had ANY intention of letting slavery gradually "expire".

In addition, measures taken in attempts to please all factions, eventually ended-up satisfying NO ONE and inflaming EVERYONE.  The "Fugitive Slave Act", was too much for the North to tolerate and not enough for the South.  Even ignoring the gross violations it perpetrated on Free Blacks who were forced back into slavery and the very idea of not permitting people to speak or produce evidence on their own behalf, this Federal law road rough-shod over the rules of the states.  I found McPherson's words on the irony of the South backing a strong Federal law and the North standing-up for States' rights to be right on the money:

"Thus the supremacy of federal law, supported by the South, was upheld, and state sovereignty, supported by the North, was struck down --- indeed an ironic commentary on the South's traditional commitment to states' rights."
(McPherson, 89)

Ultimately, I discovered, the only thing that the "Fugitive Slave Act" actually accomplished was to strengthen the anti-slavery sentiment and resolve in the North.