Summary Of Team Of Rivals By Doris Kearns Goodwin

Team of Rivals is a book written by Doris Kearns Goodwin, a renowned American historian. Her book is more than a biography about Lincoln; as suggested by the title, the book is also about the combined efforts of the members of Abraham Lincoln’s Cabinet from 1861 to 1865. The book follows the Secretary of State, William H. Seward, the Secretary of the Treasury, Salmon P. Chase, and the Attorney General, Edward Bates. The book focuses on Lincoln’s life, both public and private.

"The Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln" The Team of Rivals was written by Doris Kearns Goodwin, a renowned Pulitzer Prize winning historian and American novelist. In The Team of Rivals, Goodwin seeks to show the story surrounding Abraham Lincoln’s cabinet and his presidency. Goodwin carefully details the background of Lincoln and each member of his Cabinet by painting a picture of each man's character and personality. In The Team of Rivals, Goodwin eloquently shows the strength of Lincolns conviction as he graciously but firmly led his cabinet while still humbly considering their counsel in every matter. The Team of Rivals thoroughly and meticulously narrates one of the most tumultuous periods in American history.

As stated by Northern Illinois University, “In that act Illinois' Democratic Senator Stephen A. Douglas had attempted to organize the vast Nebraska territory for settlement and the passage of a transcontinental railroad”.(Monroe, R.D.) Unfortunately, Nebraska lands belonged to Indians, and was identified as a desert. Knowing the situation, Douglas proposed the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854, Northern Illinois University said, “Douglas framed the bill with the idea that the people of Nebraska and Kansas should decide for themselves whether they wished to permit slavery, a doctrine he called "popular sovereignty. "”(Monroe, R.D.) Douglas wanted to expand the north, but it created many issues for the Northern and Southern states.

During his two terms in office, President Jackson would not only implement a series of policies that drastically expanded slavery, but he would also create a pro-slavery sentiment in America that would reverberate for many generations after his final term in office. In the first part of this essay, I will introduce the election of 1828. In the second part of this essay, I will attempt to explain why Andrew Jackson's arrival to the presidential Mansion had such a profound effect on Southern secession. The election of 1824 was a pivotal moment in American history.

James Oakes’ political analysis of the relationship between Abraham Lincoln and Frederick Douglass is an intricate one. He pursues the duos; a frontier lawyer and a former slave, the president and the most sought after black, the shrewd politician and an agile reformer who are carefully engaged in the context of political succession, emancipation and civil war in the 19th century. Being a prime time when slavery is a fiercely contested issue, the two closely associate in the bold spectrum, differing and agreeing, disregarding and approving each other in different instances, with Oakes ultimately drawing their paths through the epic transformation. This paper seeks out Douglass’ and Lincoln’s approaches that shift some positions in slavery abolition in 19th century America.

Stephen Douglas, an advocate of popular sovereignty, and Abraham Lincoln, a Republican candidate, were both running to represent Illinois in the United States Senate. These two men met in a sequence of seven debates before they battled for office of presidency in the election of 1858. Slavery eventually became the main issue discussed repeatedly in each of the debates, due to the Mexican War adding new territories left to be assessed as free soil or not. During this time, the Compromise of 1850 was a temporary fix to the sectional issues for the states that made the decision to participate in the extension of slavery. However, the Missouri Compromise of 1854 brought the issue back up again.

African Americans held a significant role in the politics of slavery because of their opposition to slavery and racism. Mason highlights the influence African American had on making slavery a political issue. African Americans participated in rebellious behaviors that the Southern tried to control which led to rising tension between North and South. Mason states that the “African American Struggle for freedom and equality, contributed to the divergence between America’s emergent sections” (129). The political pursuit of free blacks in North and South encouraged protest in the slave

“Lincoln identified the westward expansion of slavery as the key issue” (video). The issue brings in the question of the delicate balance of power in the Congress. “Just as northerners believed westward expansion essential to their economic well-being, southern leaders became convinced that slavery must expand or die” writes Eric Foner (483). Without slavery expanding with the addition of new states, slave states would permanently assume a minority position of representation within government. The interests of Southern pro-slavery states would not be secure in a Union subjugated by non-slaveholding states.

Sawyer’s document depicts the massive emphasis of the necessity of slaves southerners had during the period leading up to the Civil War. While abolitionist movements worked in the North, pro-slavery sympathizers were creating documents, like this, in order to provide reasoning for cultivating a pro-slavery environment. Southern defended the Southern slave system and stated that it had a positive effect on society by asserting that it is a positive ally for religious entities, arguing that it is beneficial for the overall physical and moral health of the populations of slave-holding states, as well as by claiming that it is a necessity for the United States economy. After analyzing Sawyer’s reasoning for keeping slavery as an institution in the United States one has the ability to evaluate current assessments of controversial institutions in today’s world and calculate the value of those

During the time period of 1860 through 1877, there were horrid events that occurred. The North and the South states had an ongoing feud. They were feuding over the problems of slavery, and whether or not it should be a continued tradition. In 1861 through 1865 a massive event took place, the Civil War, where Abraham Lincoln was the face and figure of that time. This was without a doubt Americans fighting against fellow Americans.

With all that in mind, the Compromise of 1850 eased the tensions between the North and the South, but only for a short while. Four years after the compromise, Stephen A. Douglas, a senator from Illinois, introduced a bill that dealt would allow residents in Kansas and Nebraska to decide on the state of slavery in their states. This new law would also nullify the Missouri Compromise Line that had been in effect for decades because Kansas and Nebraska were on different sides of it. The removal of the Missouri Compromise Line was a major issue for the Democratic Party. Democrats from the North preferred the idea of popular sovereignty, while those from the South preferred outright slavery.

‘Slavery was the root cause of secession’. ‘November 6 1860, Lincoln was elected president of America which resulted in panic emerging in the South’ . The election of Lincoln as president who was a Republican leader meant that ideologies, movements and values from the North would be implemented in the South which meant the abolition of slavery. Slavery was a huge characteristic of the South as the economy; politics; social status and psychological mind-sets were influenced by the process of slavery. The southern white population then derived the idea of secession which meant the South would gain independence from Northern aggression .

In the early 1800’s many homeowners had slaves to do work for them. Slaves were treated terribly, had little to eat and had no rights to protect them. When the United States was established the Union split into two sides, pro-slavery and non-slavery states. The South was filled with slave owners and the North was filled with people who wanted to abolish it for good. After this the Union was highly motivated to end it, but there were many in the United States who wanted to increase it and some wanted to abolish it.

By the 1850’s many Americans in the North began to oppose slavery in the South because many thought slavery to be religiously wrong and immoral. Additionally, slavery was causing a political division between slave and free states, and was coming in the way of the national growth of the United States. Moreover, the horror of how slavery was practiced, religious values, and the political crisis slavery were the main features of slavery that were affecting and influencing the opinions of Northerners. Those Americans who lived in the North didn’t’ just have a moral enlightenment.

“The South grew, but it did not develop,” is the way one historian described the South during the beginning of the nineteenth century because it failed to move from an agrarian to an industrial economy. This was primarily due to the fact that the South’s agricultural economy was skyrocketing, which caused little incentive for ambitious capitalists to look elsewhere for profit. Slavery played a major role in the prosperity of the South’s economy, as well as impacting it politically and socially. However, despite the common assumption that the majority of whites in the South were slave owners, in actuality only a small minority of southern whites did in fact own slaves. With a population of just above 8 million, the number of slaveholders was only 383,637.