Second Earl Of Rochester Essay

Second Earl Of Rochester Essay
The satirists shared a talent for making other individuals feel uncomfortable, particularly by making them aware of their own moral inadequacies. They
used irony, derision, and wit to attack human vice or folly. One method the satirist utilized to catch their readers' attention, while also making them feel
uncomfortable, was to describe those things that were deemed inappropriate to discuss openly in society. The classical example of a topic that was
discussed behind closed doors, yet the satirist used freely, was sex. Mention of such things as sex can always bring a giggle, excite feelings of hidden
passion, or make one's cheeks rosy from embarrassment. John Wilmot, Second Earl of Rochester, and Jonathan Swift, were two satirist that ... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
In Rochester's Upon His Drinking a Bowl, Rochester joins the aspect of alcohol with that of sex:
Cupid, and Bacchus, my Saints are,
May drink, and Love, still reign,
With Wine, I wash away my cares,
And then to Cunt again.
This attitude of sex and drunkenness is often associated with the ancient Greeks and Romans, who Rochester makes reference to through Cupid and
Bacchus. The wine serves as a tool to rid oneself of their grasp on reason. It often drives away the feeling of anxiety that often exist between a man
and women during times of intimacy. It allows one to satisfy their bodily pleasure.
The graphic word "Cunt" not only serves as a symbol of sex and the female genitalia but is also used to bring about the disgust of any
moralist or any rational individual. A reasonable man would like to think that men do not view sex and women in such a derogatory manner. According
to Rochester, this is not so. Men are crude creatures that do think of sex and women in such a manner.
Rochester's The Imperfect Enjoyment is an amusing tale of man's greatest fear – premature ejaculation:
Smiling, she chides in a kind murm'ring Noise,

And from her Body wipes the clammy joys;
When a Thousand Kisses, wander'ring o're
My panting Bosome, – is there then no more?...
Apply'd to my dead Cinder, warms no more,
Than Fire to Ashes, cou'd past Flames restore.
Trembling, confus'd, despairing, limber, dry,
A wishing, weak,
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

APUSH Out of Many Chapter 14 notes
Chap 14–The Territorial expansion of the United States A. Community: Texans&TEJAOS "Remember the Alamo." 1. 1836, Santa Anna(President of
Mexico) came to subdue Texas–1,500 Mexican died,& Texas defenders(failed)– "remember the Alamo" eventually forced Santa Anna to recognize
Texas independence. 2. Tejanos(S. Texans)
–favored A. Settlers for their economic plan–authorized A. Colonies w/in Texas(central/ east)–attracted ppl
from Miss. Valley–introduced slavery&cotton–Tejanos, both wealthy rancheros&poor cowboy/tenant farmer(vaqueros/peones). 3. Political&socially
unstable first after revol. At 1821–Liberals favored loose federal union but strong states–Texas(not a state) favored local control–Liberals controlled
Mexican... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
In particular. 2.After Panic of 1837, more convinced that prosperity depended on trade w/Asia–looked for W.harbor (Puget Sound in Oregon, San
Diego&Francisco at Mexican controlled CA)–Sullivan was Democrat–supported expansion,but Whigs opposed it&favored industrialization bc fear
expansion of slavery. 3.Democrats also feared industrialization welcomed by Whigs–viewed as economic depression–Panic of 1837 caused by
uncontrolled growth&social unrest–seek for TJ's agrarian society to balance(also bc many were S. Who practiced cotton production)–Average farmers
moved for land hunger,national pride,curiosity,& sense of adventure. The Overland Trials: 1.Overland Trail from Missouri R. To Oregon&CA
long,dangerous,tedious&exhausting–separated from family&homeland–still streamed to W.(5еЌѓto O,3еЌѓCA in 1845&48)–bc provided economic
opportunities& healthy surrounding(appeal to panic of 1837&malaria stroke farmers), also bc men seeking for sense of adventure&women seeking for
ideal home–travel in group bc fear of natives&need help passing river&mt– often elected a leader of the "train"–democratic but not accepted
unanimously– everyone had to accept benefit/bad of new community. 2.Route danger&poorly supplied(mt&river),worst in way toward CA–(Sierra
Nevada–Donner party– cannibalism)–wagons endangered by illness&accident–Indian attack–few, but white

The Fate Of Their Country : Politicians, Slavery...
The author of "The fate of their Country: Politicians, Slavery Extensions, and the coming of Civil War", Michael F. Holt has several very good
points about the reasons why the Civil War happened. Now I am going to explain why he thinks that slavery is the main issue of the conflict
between the North and South. Why did Texas have such a pivotal role in the struggle between states? Why was the Wilmot Proviso politically
dangerous? What occurred in Kansas and why did things go do wrong? And what is the importance of the Dred Scott decision? Hold disagrees that
the political decisions made between 1846 and 1858 were the reason that increased the local aggression prior to separation and Civil War. The long
accumulated mistrust, fear and hatred that led Southerners and Northerners to war against each other was neither because of the whole cloth, nor
because of the simple products of the proven differences between the social and value systems of the North and South. Rather, Hold states that those
hatreds between the two sides were created by political actions on slavery–related issues. According to Holt: "attempts to resolve the secession crisis
foundered on the question of slavery 's future expansion into southwestern territories, where it did not exist, rather than on its guaranteed perpetuity in
the southern states, where it already did" (p. 4). By this logic, the Civil War was caused by an abstraction rather than by an actual problem. Although
the author is not directly

Fanny Fern : The Not So Humorous History Of Feminist Satire
Fanny Fern: The Not So Humorous History of Feminist Satire In the 21st century, many women, myself included, take for granted that we can wear
whatever we desire and say what we want, in public, without the fear of being thrown in jail. However, that was not always the case. While the fight
for the continued advance of women's rights rages on, women of the 19th century lived a very different life than the one, us women, lead today. The
feminist agenda was just emerging on the horizon. One particular woman was preparing to do her part to further the cause of women's rights: Sarah
Willis Parker. Parker was better known by her pen name, Fanny Fern. After facing and overcoming extreme adversity, she made the decision to start
writing. To understand how truly ground breaking Fanny Fern was, we need to understand that in a 1997 edition of an anthology of American satire
from colonial times to present, Fern was the only woman writer from the 19th century in that text. Her satiric style and controversial subject matter
was just what the oppressed needed to gain some support and give them a voice. Sarah Willis Parton was born July 9, 1811 in Portland, Maine. She
was the fifth of nine children born to Nathaniel and Hannah Parker Willis. Her father was the editor of two news publications in Boston. Her brother,
Nathaniel Parker Willis, was an accomplished journalist. As a young woman, Sarah attended a boarding school in Hartford, Connecticut. It was at this
school

The Pros And Cons Of Slavery In America
Sectional Conflict Intensifies
The year was 1848. American forces had taken over Mexico city, and the leaders of the Mexican Army had just signed the Treaty of Guadalupe
Hidalgo. America had won the war with Mexico (The American Vision 311). Everything seemed to be going great in the new union; however, as more
and more states entered, many different leaders had different opinions about a problem that had been boiling up for a while – slavery. More
specifically – what states would be allowed to have slaves and in what states slaves would still be permitted. Both the North and South argued
vigorously for their side of the argument. All the while, then President James K. Polk saw no trouble. Polk believed that people in the new territories
that had been won over from Mexico wouldn't need to argue over the issue of slavery because the dry climate of the southwest would not support the
kinds of farming that made slavery valuable (The American Vision 321), but he was very wrong.
In 1846, a Democratic Representative by the name of David Wilmot, proposed an amendment known as the Wilmot Proviso. In this amendment he
stated that any territory that the United States gained from Mexico should enter the Union and "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude shall ever
exist." (The American Vision 321). This outraged the Southerners. They were afraid that a ban of slavery in the territories would cause questions to
arise about slavery in all states in general. To counteract the Wilmot

The United States And The Mexican American War
The United States believed that it was their God given right to spread from coast to coast. The people of the young nation set out to do just that on a
journey unofficially called the Manifest Destiny. President James. K. Polk offered Mexico twenty–five million dollars for the area of Texas and told
Mexican leaders to name their price on California. The United States needed the land to fulfill their destiny to spread across the continent. Although the
offer was a very generous Mexico declined. Thereby, American troops were sent down past the Nueces River to "poke" or cause enough tension for
Mexicans to fire upon American troops to start the first battle. The Mexicans believed the Nueces River was the border of America and Mexico, but...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The gold rush in all brought in over two billion dollars worth of the desired metal. Had the United States not done what it took to get the land the
discovery of gold could have been postponed decades. Therefore, meaning America may not have ever gotten that money. Not only was the gold
rush favorable to the economy, but the land was also great for agriculture and industry. Numerous citizens that moved west did not do so for gold,
several moved west to start a business or a farm. The businesses started over in the west would prove to be for the best for most families and helped
the United States' economy. The idea of moving west and finding gold or start a business to help the "49ers" to get rich quick thrilled many
American citizens which aided the growth of the west. The land was not the only benefit; the Mexican American war was the first war in American
history to be fought primarily on foreign soil. So because the war was fought on Mexico's land the United States did not have to pay for damages
done during the conflict. As a result, the American economy did not take another devastating hit to pay for the wreckage. Overall the decision to go to
war with Mexico for the land was an economic success, although it caused controversy socially and politically. Politically the bloodshed and enmity
between the Mexicans and Americans was a disaster. The war caused more problems than it

Sectionalism (1840-1861)
Westward Expansion and Sectionalism (1840–1861)
At the end of the Mexican War during Polk's term as president, many new lands west of Texas were yielded to the United States, and the debate
over the westward expansion of slavery was rekindled. Southern politicians and slave owners demanded that slavery be allowed in the West because
they feared that a closed door would spell doom for their economy and way of life. Whig Northerners, however, believed that slavery should be
banned from the new territories. Pennsylvanian congressman David Wilmot proposed such a ban in 1846, even before the conclusion of the war.
Southerners were outraged over this Wilmot Proviso and blocked it before it could reach the Senate. When this act was denied it... Show more content
on Helpwriting.net ...
A Democratic senator from Illinois, Douglas was responsible for pushing the finished piece of legislature through Congress.
The Compromise of 1850, as it was called, was a bundle of legislation that everyone could agree on. First, congressmen agreed that California would
be admitted to the Union as a free state (Utah was not admitted because the Mormons refused to give up the practice of polygamy). The fate of
slavery in the other territories, though, would be determined by popular sovereignty. Next, the slave trade (though not slavery itself) was banned in
Washington, D.C. Additionally, Texas had to give up some of its land to form the New Mexican territory in exchange for a cancellation of debts owed
to the federal government. Finally, Congress agreed to pass a newer and tougher Fugitive Slave Act to enforce the return of escaped slaves to the South.
Though both sides agreed to it, the Compromise of 1850 clearly favored the North over the South. California 's admission as a free state not only set
a precedent in the West against the expansion of slavery, but also ended the sectional balance in the Senate, with sixteen free states to fifteen slave
states. Ever since the Missouri Compromise, this balance had always been considered essential to prevent the North from banning slavery. The South
also conceded to end the slave trade in

The Wilmot Proviso: After The Mexican War
The Wilmot Proviso After the Mexican War had ended, a Democratic congressman from PA, David Wilmot, gave a provocative speech to the
House that endorsed the annexation of Texas as a slave state on August 8 of 1846. Because Mexico now forbade slavery, Wilmot declared that if
any new territory were to be acquired from Mexico, there should be no slavery or involuntary servitude there. His Proviso sparked new political
conflict and debate over the extension of slavery and tested the Missouri Compromise that had protected both slave states and free states and not
permitting it in newly admitted states. With newly acquired territory from the Mexican War, the national debate continued and in 1846, the House of
Representatives passed the Wilmot Proviso but it did not pass through the Senate. President Polk decided that the debate over slavery had nothing to
do with the war in Mexico and dismissed the proviso as mischievous and foolish". Furthermore, the president convinced Wilmot to withhold his
amendment from any bill in relation with the annexation of Mexican territories. Although his proviso did not pass, his idea kept appearing in
Congress years after. People who opposed his Proviso wrote a thesis to counter the proviso such as John C. Calhoun. Calhoun declared that slavery
should be allowed in the Mexican territory because per the Fifth Amendment, people were granted life, liberty and property; slaves were property.
Thus the topic of slavery played a prominent role in dividing

The United States And The Civil War
In the 1800s Mexico owned a large portion of North America. This Mexican territory included the current country of Mexico along with, Arizona,
Colorado, California, New Mexico, parts of Nevada, and Texas. When the Mexican government allowed American to live in Texas conflicts arose
between the settlers and government. The Americans rebelled and stared their own republic and asked to join the United States. After much debate, the
Republic of Texas was annexed and shortly after a war broke out between the States and Mexico. After Americans settled in Texas under the Mexican
government, rebelled and formed their own republic, the Mexican war started when the territory disputes led a group of Mexican forces to attack
American soldiers in the disputed area. The war stretched over two years showcasing the work of upcoming military leaders, such as "Stonewall"
Jackson. After the war , the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo settled the current western borders of the states while the Wilmot Proviso attempted to set up
an anti–slavery policy in the newly added lands. In 1824, Mexico decided to let Americans settle in Texas. The Mexican government agreed to give
Americans land grants if they became Catholic and learned Spanish ; by 1830 there were about 7,000 Americans in Texas (Keene,325). Soon there
proved to be a clash of interest between the new settlers and the Texan Mexicans, called Tejanos. The American 's neglected the conditions of their
settlement and brought many slaves into

Analysis of Rochester's A Satyr Against Mankind Essay
Analysis of Rochester's A Satyr Against Mankind
Although John Wilmot, better known as the Earl of Rochester, wrote "A Satyr Against Mankind" in 1679, his ideas are still relevant over three
centuries later. His foresight in satirizing humankind's use of reason reinforces the intrinsic role of rationality in the human condition. But implicit in his
condemnation of rationality is an intentional fallacy–the speaker of the poem uses reason in the same manner as those that he claims to abhor. In doing
this, Rochester widens the perimeter of his criticism to encompass the speaker as well as those he admonishes, a movement that magnifies the satire.
Considering this, the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Leaping from unsupported assertions to logical conclusions, the speaker is a "misguided follower" (16) of his intellect, continuing his "Pathless and
dangerous wandering" in his rant by haphazardly linking disparate qualms about man's proud use of reason (14). The narrator paints himself into his
own skewed portrait of hyper–rational people. However, Rochester accomplishes this ironic placement unobtrusively, showing how easily the speaker
is influenced by logical caprice without explicitly stating that fact.
Eventually, the narrator contests, a lifetime of experience will provide man with the surprise that his reliance on reason has been fruitless, that he has
been incorrect in his logical methodology. "Huddled in dirt the reasoning engine lies," the narrator evokes the image of a broken machine–a mechanism
that collapses with the revelation of failure (29). Implicit in this segment of the speaker's argument is that one does not recognize when others break; he
must yield to the discovery himself. From this, one may infer that the narrator has already found himself huddled in dirt, for he understands the descent
into epiphany from reason unbound. Despite this, he continues to manifest the same erratically rational behavior, suggesting that while the broken
machine may gradually realize it is broken, it is

Compromises During The 1860's
During the 1820's, disagreement and other conflicts between the North and South had grown to such a high that compromise was needed to sort out
their problems. Many of these disagreements flourished from unfair amounts of North to South representatives in Congress and which territories
should be a slave state once new land had been acquired. Up until about 1850, compromise had been the key way of free and slave states staying
united, but when most recent compromise (Compromise of 1850) failed, the South seceded. After this succession, America entered the bloodiest war
of all prior and after. The Missouri Compromise was passed into law in 1820 and was proposed by Henry Clay. Seventeen years earlier the Louisiana
Purchase allowed the United

Manifest Destiny And The Mexican-American War
The idea of Manifest Destiny, the belief that American settlers had the God–given right to expand across North America, essentially led to the
Mexican–American War. This American belief eventually caused a tremendous deal of suffering for many Native Americans, Mexicans, and
American citizens. Tensions grew between the North American independent nation and Mexico when Texas later became a state in the U.S
following the war over Texas earlier on. Consequently, dispute over the border lines of Texas triggered military confrontation as well as President
Polk's desire for war to acquire large areas of land from Mexico. The Treaty of Guadalupe–Hidalgo ended the war formally, and as a result, the United
States received the disputed Texas territory, as well as the New Mexico Territory and California. The Mexican
–American War pinned America at a
crossroads in the controversial debate over slavery in the country when it liberated an immense amount of tension and strain among the North and
South over which land would be considered free and the other slave. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The compromise admitted Missouri as a slave state and in return, Maine would be admitted into the Union as a free state. With the exception of
Missouri, the Missouri Compromise prohibited slavery in the Louisiana Territory north of the 36'30" latitude line. However, with the acquisition of
Texas into the Union as a result of the Mexican–American War, the Missouri Compromise would be conflicted with and the balance in Congress
would be disrupted. The question was again brought up, would the new land be free or slave? The Missouri Compromise would later be repealed
causing the issue of slavery to be reopened in the U.S. and later the Civil

North South Tensions Before Civil War
Ajit Beeki
Ms. Jones
North–South Tensions before Civil War The Civil War was not a spontaneous conflict, rather it was the culmination of various events in American
history that were in the two decades preceding it. These events exposed a rift in American society which would eventually lead to the Civil War.
Among these events were the Kansas–Nebraska Act and Mexican–American War. Both of them lead to a highly polarized reactions from Northerners
and Southerners in the slavery debate. In the end, the Kansas–Nebraska Act and Mexican–American War intensified Northern opposition to slavery,
which as a result put America on a path to war. Despite the fact that the Mexican War, happened more than a decade before theAmerican Civil War, Mr.
Polk's war was vital in reigniting the debate on slavery and lead to more political action from Northerners on the issue. From the time he was sworn
into office, Polk readied for Westward Expansion. He attempted to extend the United State 's borders by buying Mexico's northern lands (Norton 356).
In 1846, when Mexico refused to sell, Polk basically guided the two countries to war (356–357). Two years later, the war officially ended with the
Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which basically stipulated that America gained all of Mexico's territory north of the Rio Grande (358). But while the
war, at least in the eyes of Polk, had been in success, it brought an issue which had been avoided and tabled for a very long time: slavery (359). On one

Civil War Inevitable Research Paper
When asked the question, "Was the Civil War Inevitable", the answer was straightforward to me. I think it was inevitable, because the North and
South had many different views and opinions on certain issues. As a result of these differences, many conflicts began. One example, being the Wilmot
Proviso in 1846, when many northerners feared the southerners would extend slavery into the West. David Wilmot, a member of Congress from
Pennsylvania, called for slavery to be banned in any of the states that were free from mexico. The southerners didn't approve of this Wilmot Proviso
[Page 461], because the South didn't want to lose the slaves that were working for them to the north, who wanted the slaves to be free. I know the north
and the south fought prior... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The north didn't want slavery, but were told to return the slaves who tried to escape. And the Abolitionists just wanted the slavery to end throughout
the entire country. This dispute about slavery led to the free soil party. After this event, I wanted to believe there would be a compromise.
Unfortunately, the dispute about slavery in the states would started again with Clay vs. Calhoun. Henry Clay pleaded for the north and south to reach
an agreement, but John Calhoun wanted slavery in the western territories. [Page 464] In my opinion, this began to help settle the dispute about the
freedom of the slaves, because the slaves now had to accept they weren't going to be allowed freedom. This event also set the agreement, that the
slaves be returned to the south, at the same time the north could separate peacefully to cause a lessening of this ongoing problem, if they refused to
take part in this. I agree with the way this was handled, until the south stated they would use force to leave the union if an agreement could not be
reached. While Clay and Calhoun thought they settled what couldn't be settled, they should have known it wasn't going to end without a cold, bloody,
civil war. In conclusion, these

Abraham Lincoln: Is He An Abolitionist Or Anti-Expansionist?
Abraham Lincoln wrote a letter to a friend Joshua Speed in August of 24, 1855. From this letter we can infer Lincoln's opinion on several topics
from slavery, Kansas Nebraska Act, his political party, and his reasons. Also from this letter we know that Lincoln and Speed clearly have different
views despite being friends. Speed believes in slavery and on the other hand Lincoln dislikes it. "You know I dislike slavery; and you fully admit the
abstract wrong of it" (Lincoln). But let's be clear Lincoln was not an abolitionist, but an anti–expansionist. We know this because he expressed his
feelings about the Wilmot Proviso in this letter. "When I was at Washington I voted for the Wilmot proviso as good as forty times, and I never heard of
anyone

Free Soil Movement Research Paper
The Free Soil Movement is a movement started by the Free Soilers as a result of the Wilmot Proviso from the 1840s. The Wilmot Proviso emerged
as a response to issue of slavery in new territories that America had a result of the Mexican War. However, the Wilmot Proviso was too controversial
and only caused further outrage amongst the both sections. The Free Soilers had a very simple and quite reasonable idea that seemed to be a feasible
compromise for the two conflicting sides. The Free Soilers did not insist on the termination of the institution of slavery , which would make the
Southerners very happy, although, they solicited that the land in the West would be a place of contingency for whites only. They did not want to have
to contend with slaves or free African Americans. The Free Soil movement appealed to many whites because of the opportunity that a black / slave–
free environment seemed to present. It seemed like the... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The Wilmot Proviso emerged as a response to issue of slavery in new territories that America had a result of the Mexican War. However, the Wilmot
Proviso was too controversial and only caused further outrage amongst the both sections. The Free Soilers had a very simple and quite reasonable
idea that seemed to be a feasible compromise for the two conflicting sides. The Free Soilers did not insist on the termination of the institution of
slavery , which would make the Southerners very happy, although, they solicited that the land in the West would be a place of contingency for whites
only. They did not want to have to contend with slaves or free African

Theme Of Individualism In Walt Whitman's Leaves Of Grass
Individualism is important. This statement is made clear in Walt Whitman's book, Leaves of Grass, published in 1855. Leaves of Grass is a poetry
collection composed in the nineteenth–century, during the Westward Expansion. Contrary to popular poetic style in that period, Whitman wrote in
free–verse, meaning there was little to no rhyming or tempo. Individualism is a theme that sets the tone of Whitman's poems. Whitman uses the literary
devices of repetition, asyndeton, imagery, and conflict to create the idea of individualism to set the tone. The repetition present in Whitman's works
contributes significantly to the theme of his poems. Repetition can be used to emphasize differences; moreover, it can stress the individuality of every
person. Whitman's work, "I Hear America Singing," is an example of emphasizing differences, with lines 2–4 being, "Those of mechanics, each one
singing his as it should be blithe and strong, /The carpenter singing his as he measures his plank or beam, /The mason singing his as he makes ready
for work, or leaves off work,..." "Singing" what belongs to them, each has a unique "song" that only appertains to them. Similarities do appear in the
repetition of Whitman's works, revealing that this literary device can create an effect of resemblance between ideas. Taken from "O Me! O Life!" is
lines 2–3, "Of the endless trains of the faithless, of cities fill'd with the foolish, /Of myself forever reproaching myself, (for who more foolish

Meaning and Texture of the Seventh Poem in Leaves of...
Meaning and Texture of the Seventh Poem in Leaves of Grass
Walt Whitman's seventh poem in his work, Leaves of Grass, displays the subtlety with which the poet is able to manipulate the reader's emotions. In
this poem there are no particular emotional images, but the overall image painted by word choice and use of sounds is quite profound. This poem, like
many others written by Walt Whitman, is somewhat somber in mood, but not morose. It is serious, but not to the point of gloom. Whitman writes
concerning the general idea that everything is merged together and is one. One cannot die without being born, just as one cannot be a mother without
first having one. The purpose of the poem is to show those things that are real are ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
He makes many lines quite long, but only those that link ideas together. He speaks of death and birth in the same line in the second stanza, just as he
talks of male and female in the same line in the third stanza. He does this to aid the reader in deciphering the meaning of the poem. Everything is truth;
everything is unified, even those things we perceive as opposite.
Strong adjectives illustrating his point are also prevalent in the poem. He writes, "I.../Am around, tenacious, acquisitive, tireless...." He uses these
words to merely illustrate the concept that the soul, or omnipotent being, is always there watching. These adjectives make the poem more descriptive,
and they paint a more vivid picture in the reader's mind. Also, he chooses many words that have soft sounds with endings like –ss, –th, etc. These
words include, pass, earth, birth, and many others. However, he then counterbalances these with harder sounding words like adjunct, immortal, and
begetters. Even the words of the poem serve to illustrate his point of universal unity.
The repetition in the poem also aids in understanding the overall message of the poem. He only says what he is and what, "For me..." the world is.
Whitman's manipulation of words portrays a more optimistic, positive view, not a

Slavery During The Civil War
Although the north and south were living completely different lifestyles, abolitionists from north were against slavery and advocated emancipation to
slaves in the south. Slavery may not have been the only factor that sparked a disagreement between the north and south but it certainly had an influence
on states decisions to remain or leave the Union. The conflict of slavery has been an issue as early as the American Revolution but it became a serious
problem around the 1850's and during the Civil War. The impact slavery had on the Union can be seen in events such as the Richmond Riots which
began when the north blockaded the south's ports, the Emancipation that freed all slaves, and the 13th and 14th Amendment which officially abolished
slavery and granted African Americans equal rights as Whites. Unfortunately, the status of African Americans in the United States were not improving
and can be seen in the Black Codes which was a step back from emancipation. The South was struggling economically in 1863 due to the North
blockading Southern ports. Families in the South were going through a food supply shortage and had to cope with a continuing increase in inflation
that was affecting the civilians affiliated with the Confederacy. On April 2, 1863 nearly three hundred women and children rioted the Confederate
capital of Richmond with knives and guns to ransack any goods that were needed for their families, but unfortunately could not afford. This faction of
women petitioned

The Beauty of Walt Whitman's When I Heard the Learn'd...
The Beauty of Walt Whitman's When I Heard the Learn'd Astronomer
My father is an amateur astronomer. It is his passion, after he comes home from work at the office, to wait outside in the fields surrounding our
house with his 10" LX200 F6.3 telescope until all hours of the morning, waiting for the perfect shot of galaxies like NGC 7479 or M16. The next
evening at dinner, despite being awake for over thirty hours, he speaks non–stop about how he finally got the perfect shot after five hours of
painstaking positioning, how the galaxy, the nebula, the distant moon or dying star existed, or how it was turning back into scattered atoms leaving
only a purplish ring of dust to prove it was ever there. A few weeks ago, an article in the... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Instead of asking "How does it work?" as is everyone else, he begins to ask "What do we gain by knowing?" And herein lies the beginning of the
investigation Whitman undertakes through his poetry.
The first four lines describe the experience the speaker had while in the lecture room. They don't directly give away his feelings regarding what is
going on around him; he leaves the reader to detect the attitude on his/her own. The first half could practically be construed as one long first line, since
all four serve the same general purpose–that is, to subtly set the beginning tone while creating an adequate contrast with the last four lines of the poem.
They seem to focus mainly on providing an accurate picture of the situation around the speaker, and are structurally more complex, providing a more
straightforward description than the last four lines. Each line becomes progressively longer than the next, and the words Whitman chooses are rather
flat and all quite literal in their meanings. This first half seems to be a forthright narrative describing his experience in the lecture hall. But delicate
hints in the text itself insinuate his attitude toward the lecture and audience.
The most conspicuous trend is Whitman's application of repetition. The repetition of the beginning word "when" creates a monotonous, listing style
also employed in the next three lines illustrating stylistically and

Wilmot Proviso
Wilmot Proviso
It could be said that the American Civil War was brought on by Americans need to expand its territories and the one sided Mexican War. The whole
debate or controversy over this expansion was David Wilmot's (and his squad of backers: Hamlin, Brinkerhoff, and King) trying to implement the
Wilmot Proviso into the funding for the Mexican territories we acquired. The proviso actually fueled the debate over slavery into the newly acquired
territories by trying to make the territories slave free acquisitions. The Wilmot Proviso was a simply desire to make newly acquired territories free
from slavery. As pointed out in the opening of this discussion however, banning slavery in these territories was a mute point in the fore... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
[5] The southerners started to become enraged at the fact they were being told what to do and how to do it.
So what was the impact of the Wilmot Proviso on the debate over slavery in America? Some would say that the Wilmot Proviso is one of the top five
reasons or causes for the Civil War and I might have to agree with that as well.
In my opinion, the proviso just fueled the fire on the slavery debate simply due to the fact that it was pointless in the sense they were trying to
impose a ban on in area that would have not really benefited from the use of slaves anyway. The areas of Texas, Arizona, and California were not
geographic areas where slaves would have made a great deal of difference anyway so the proviso was pointless to them. The proviso was trying to
impose a ban on slavery in areas where there was to be little need for slaves anyway. So the proviso was just a platform to them to impose slavery bans
in the south and expand their agenda on the issue. The southern states saw the proviso as an insult to the Southern states and their stand on slavery. Of
course, I do think they were moving in the right direction from a humanitarian standpoint they were going about it the wrong way. The debate should
have been over the constitutionality of the issue all together and the rights of all men/women. They even entertained the thought of popular sovereignty
but that would just have let the issue as is

The Election Of 1844 Pitted James Polk
The election of 1844 pitted James Polk, a Democrat expansionist, against Whig leader Henry Clay. One of Polk's slogan was called, 54В°40 or Flight,
which supported pushing foreign troops past that latitude and out of the Oregon Territory. Fundamentally, that was jointly administered by the United
States and British in Canada. Polk's supporters also wanted the immediate annexation of Texas as well as expansion into the Mexican–claimed
territories of New Mexico, Arizona, and California. Clay, too, favored expansion, but at a slower rate. He also hoped to avoid war by negotiating with
Mexico and Britain for the land America wanted. The election was close, but in the end Polk won. In the last days of his administration, President Tyler
proposed the annexation of Texas, arguing that Polk's victory amounted to a mandate for annexation. The annexation vote was passed, theUnited States
annexed Texas, and Mexico broke off diplomatic relations. Under these circumstances, war with Mexico seemed likely. Consequently, Polk conceded
on demands for expansion deep into Canada and set about instead to negotiated a more reasonable American–Canadian border. The Oregon Treaty,
signed with Great Britain in 1846, allowed the U.S. to acquire peacefully what is now Oregon, Washington, Wyoming, Montana, and Idaho. Reasonably
certain that war in the Northwest could be avoided, Polk concentrated on efforts to claim the Southwest from Mexico... He tried to buy the territory, and
when that failed, he

Whitman's Essay 'When I Heard The Learn' D Astronomer
A poet who would agree with Albert Einstein statement of "Education is not the learning of facts, but the training of the mind to think" is Walt
Whitman. For in his poem "When I Heard the Learn'd Astronomer" he has his speaker try to learn through education then experience. Walt Whitman
first presents to our readers to a speaker who wants to learn astronomy and attends a lecture. By doing this, Walt Whitman wants to illustrate the
disadvantages of education and how it solely relies on numbers and diagrams. Walt Whitman wants to emphasize the value of experience in his poem
through his use of imagery, sound, and syntax.
Through his writing, Walt Whitman tries to have his readers understand his statement by giving the reader the ability to relate. In his poem "When I
Heard the Learn'd Astronomer" he has his speaker in an educational setting listening to an astronomer give a lecture about astronomy. This setting is
easy to imagine and effective. The speakers describe that "proofs" (2), and "figures"(2) were all presented to him with no further evidence or
explanation given making the speaker "tired and sick"(6). The speaker is now disinterested and disappointed ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net
...
The introduction technically was longer since lines 4 to 5 go together while the ending lines 6–9 are their own lines. Walt Whitman felt like there was
more of an explanation when it came to education while for experience it was short and simple. Another detail that stood out was the use of commas
for it was included in every line except of course for the last one. Walt Whitman did not provide any type of closure until the ending "Looked up in
perfect silence at the stars."(9) when the speaker was satisfied because he knew that for the speaker it was not over until he learned from experience.
After line five "in the lecture–room," Walt Whitman could have ended that line with a period but he did not for there was another opportunity for the
speaker to

The Mexican-American War In The United States
"They became engaged with a large body of these Mexican troops, and after a short affair, in which some sixteen Americans were killed and wounded,
appear to have been surrounded and compelled to surrender,"1 said by United States President James K. Polk during the Mexican–American War.
James K. Polk meaning behind this quote was the description of the event itself. The war caused tension within the United States over the newly
acquired territory and fulfilled Manifest Destiny through the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. The Mexican–American War impacted the United States
and Mexico's relationship and influenced internal developments in the United States.
The Mexican–American War started on April 25, 1846 under General Zachary Taylor's command.... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Mexican–American War had an impact on the relationship between the United States through the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, concept of Manifest
Destiny, and the California Gold Rush. As well the Mexican–American war influenced internal developments such as popular sovereignty, Wilmot
Proviso, and causing the Civil War to begin. "These men were religious when the spirit of religion was buried in forms and ceremonies, and when the
priesthood had armed itself with the civil powers to put down all opposition, and suppress all freedom, intellectual, civil, and religious." 15 said by
American soldier, Ethan A. Hitchcock during the Mexican–American

The Learned Astronomer
Behind "When I heard the Learned Astronomer" "When I heard the Learned Astronomer" by Walt Whitman is about how formal education can reduce
a subject's appealing nature. At beginning of the poem, the narrator describes themselves being lectured at by an astronomer. Since the narrator states
that he is in a lecture room being presented with charts and diagrams, it is clear that he is in an educational environment. The narrator soon becomes
"tired and sick" from the lecture and leaves to stargaze(Whitman 5). In spite of the disdain he feels for the astronomy lecture, the narrator expresses
great admiration for the stars, which is illustrated through how he describes himself "[looking] up in perfect silence at the stars"(Whitman 8). His use of

Border Conflicts During The Mexican American War
The Mexican American War was based around the territorial expansion into Mexican land. However, what seemed like border disputes and land grants
actually turned into one of the biggest debates over slavery since America had come about. Though sectionalism and the rights of slaves stayed the
same, the Mexican American War marked the turning point of slavery in 1846–1848 through immense changes such as disputes over free and slave
states, the Fugitive Slave Law, and the Wilmot Proviso. Although many conflicts arose during the Mexican American War, one problem did not change;
the treatment of slaves. Before and after the war, slaves were considered as property rather than humans. An African–American by the name of Dred
Scott, pushed for his citizenship in court. Scott's owner freed him from slavery, however, his owner... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Mexicans argued that the border was the Nueces River, but the U.S. disagreed and declared it was the Rio Grande. In order for the war to look like
Mexico provoked the U.S., President James K. Polk sent troops in between the two rivers and once Mexico crossed the Rio Grande, supposedly
invading our land, the troops retaliated and eventually the war ended with the Treaty of Guadalupe. As a result, theUnited States expanded into the
Southwest territories.
In consequence to the war, many disputes took place regarding the consideration of whether the new territories would become free or slave states.
Many abolitionists opposed the war because as land grew, so would slavery. They were quickly ignored, as devoted nationalists urged the expansion of
the the country. The new land nearly made up 1/3 of the United States by adding Texas, California, the Utah Territory, and the New Mexico Territory.
The Southern section of the United States wanted these new territories to be to be strictly slave states, whereas the North thought

Debate on Civil War
American Historians' Debate on the Civil War
The American Civil War has without a doubt left a permanent divide on this great nation's past and present. American historians still debate the causes
of a war that began in 1861 between the Union states and Confederacy states. The war can be seen as caused by the principle of slavery, the growing
tension between northern and southern ideology or due to a crack in the political system of the time. United States' history classes focus on teaching
students different views as to the origin of the Civil War. Three renowned American historians who explore this topic beautifully are Eric Foner, James
G. Randall, and Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. Foner provides the best explanation to the origin of... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Schlesinger also makes the point that abolitionists were as important in the issue of slavery in the Civil War as anti–Nazis and anti–Communists are
today (Schlesinger 3). Arthur Schlesinger refuted Randall's position on the Civil War so powerfully, that he used his own words and logic against
him. If James G. Randall had read the aforementioned article by Arthur M. Schlesinger, his response would be that the interpretation given by
Arthur is a poor approach to history. Randall has stated in his article, The Blundering Generation, how many historians view culture issues, such as
the sectionalism between the north and south in the United Sates, as inevitable causes for Civil War. However, to James Randall, many other
countries face the same problems without resorting to the same measures. Randall gives the example of "Scandinavia or the Netherlands or
Switzerland (Randall 3)" as countries with culture and racial issues that have not waged war for the purpose of cultural ideology, as he portrays
slavery to be. Randall does not believe a moral issue like slavery to be enough of a driving force between war, especially one that produced the most
American deaths than any other war. James Randall believes, "war causation tends to be 'explained' in terms of great forces (Randall 4)." Randall
credits most of the great forces to be a result of the

What Led To The Rise Of Slavery In The Late 1800's
In the late 1800's, slavery was a very controversial topic in the United States. There was no peace about it. Slavery caused families to split, and
brothers to kill one another. With feelings so strong on this topic, it was extremely difficult to please both sides– the North and the South. This was
especially difficult when running for president. Many strategies were tested, but only a few prevailed. Some candidates thought it would be best to let
the people decide whether or not their state was pro or anti–slavery. One candidate did not take much of a stand for either side. Presidents Zachary
Taylor, Millard Fillmore, Franklin Pierce, and James Buchanan all made it to the White House, but did not leave much of a legacy do to their stances
on slavery.... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Taylor took a vague approach when sharing his political beliefs. Taylor's popularity from the Mexican American War helped boost him to the White
House. Although Taylor owned slaves himself, he did not support slavery expanding to the West. This angered the North and the South. The South
wanted Taylor to veto the Wilmot Proviso, which would ban the expansion of slavery in the territory gained from the Mexican American War. Taylor
saw vetoing this proviso as unconstitutional. He also believed that slaves in the west would be impractical because sugar and cotton would not easily
grow there. Simply not vetoing the Wilmot Proviso angered the northerners as well for they wanted him to support the Proviso, rather than not veto it.
Even though nobody completely agreed with Taylor's views on slavery, the Whig party remained loyal. The deciding factor in this election was the
Free–Soil Party – they took votes away from Lewis Cass, ultimately giving electoral votes to Zachary

What Role Did The Role Of Slavery Play In The 19th Century
The continental expansion of the United States, driven by the expansionist doctrine of "manifest destiny", instead of arousing a sense of national pride
or common cause, was the agent that exacerbated regional differences. Indeed, the westward expansion of America was the stage on which the
corrosive issue of slavery would be defended and contested, provoking and accelerating national disintegration. Starting with the debate over the
territory acquired from Mexico, it was evident that further western expansion was going to be an internal struggle between two ways of life. Fearful of
the addition of pro–slavery territory, in 1846 Pennsylvania Congressman David Wilmot introduced a resolution that called for slavery to be forbidden
in any ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
A decade before the Wilmot Proviso was proposed, John C. Calhoun, a southern politician who served as vice president for both John Quincy Adams
and Andrew Jackson, foretold the divisive role that slavery would play in the 1840s and 1850s and devised the defense of the institution that would
soon take hold in the South. As the North's calls for slavery's immediate abolition on moral grounds grew louder in the 1830s, from the likes of
William Lloyd Garrison, founder of The Liberator, and Theodore Dwight Weld, Calhoun refuted their critiques in a speech delivered on the Senate floor
in 1837. In that speech, Calhoun justified slavery as "a positive good" which must be safeguarded against northern abolitionist interference by a united
South. Calhoun and Olmsted demonstrate the sectional split that would come to shape the American political landscape of the mid–to–late 1850s:
whereas Calhoun's plea for a unified South and assertion that slavery was "a positive good" in response to increasing northern abolitionism laid the
foundation for the Democratic Party that would dominate the South, Olmsted's account deconstructs Calhoun's "positive good" theory and goes further
to outline the other strains of antislavery, free soil persuasion that defined the agenda of the Republican

What Led To The Civil War
The Civil war, one of the biggest wars fought on American soil. The battle was between the North and the South. There were many causes which led
to this war. Due to these causes it led to a lot of tension and separation between the nation. The nation split into two groups the Union and the
Confederacy. The North was all Union which had noslavery except for the border states which were Maryland, Missouri, Delaware, and Kentucky. The
ideas which led to the Civil war was sectionalism, slavery, and expansion.
Sectionalism was a big cause which led to the Civil War. In the Fugitive Slave Act any slave which escaped from their masters and were captured must
be sent back to their masters. This was one of the laws created with the compromise of 1850.

Wilmot Proviso: Anti-Slavery Movement
1. Wilmot Proviso: Amendment proposed by Congressman David Wilmot to an appropriations bill designed to eliminate slavery within land gained
through the Mexican War (1846 – 1848); although it was not passed it inflamed the growing controversy over slavery.
2. Ostend Manifesto (1852): Created by the diplomats sent to Ostend. A secret negotiation to buy Cuba from Spain that was eventually leaked to the
U.S. press and provoked a negative reaction from antislavery advocates in Congress. In 1852 President Pierce was forced to put an end to the scheme.
3. Walker Expedition (1853–1856): In 1853 William Walker had an unsuccessful attempt at taking Baja California fromMexico. However, in 1855 he
took Nicaragua with a group predominantly made up ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Underground Railroad: (Harriet Tubman) Network of abolitionists that secretly helped slaves escape to freedom by setting up hiding places and routes
to the North. Paramount to its success was Harriet Tubman.
15. Anthony Burns(1854): Born in Virginia as a slave but becomes a slave preacher. After having freedom for several years the Fugitive Slave Act
that required people to return runaway slaves to their masters made him a fugitive in Massachusetts. He has a trial that gained a lot of publicity. Protest
stirs when Burns is reinstated to become a slave, however, his freedom was bought by Boston sympathizers.
16. Uncle Tom's Cabin (written by Harriet Beecher Stowe) (1852): Heavily influenced England's view on the American Deep South and the issue of
slavery. Promoted abolition and deepened sectional conflict.
17. Impending Crisis of the South (written by Hinton R. Helper) (1857): Against both slavery and blacks and attempted to prove that non–slave owning
whites were the ones who suffered the most from slavery.
18. Sociology of the South (written by George Fitzhugh) (1854): Questioned the belief of equal rights for unequal men and condemned the capitalist
wages system as worse than

When I Heard The Learn D Astronomer Poem Analysis
Haleigh Youll
When I Heard The Learn'd Astronomer Almost every college student in the world can relate to being bored in a lecture hall. Old professors teaching
boring material that does not relate to what you want to be doing with your time. In Walt Whitman's poem, "When I Heard the Learn'd Astronomer,"
Whitman's character is describing just that. The character leaves a lecture and is one within nature. The character uses past tense throughout the entire
poem. I believe that this poem is someone reflecting on a moment in life where they made a choice between knowledge and true happiness. The
character's ability to connect with nature helps them make a tough decision about what they want in life. The title and first line of the poem are ... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The character is no longer using terms of isolation when speaking. Whitman's use of the word in shows the character is submerging themselves within
nature. No longer alone to deal with the real world. The characters thoughts are blending with the air around them. Whitman's use of the word moist
expresses the emotions the character is feeling within nature. When I think of the word moist, I think of alive and prospering. The character relates
because they are no longer stagnant in life. The characters decision to submerse themselves in the natural world will further liven up their life. The
character no longer has the weight of the world on their shoulders and is free to be who they truly want to

Pros And Cons: In The Wake Of The Freeport Doctrine
When American settlers started migrating into Texas in the early 1820's they brought with them the same culture and political agendas that would be
similar to the Confederates in the Civil War. Mexico had recently abolished slavery but the new settlers were committed to defy slavery and producing
tension with the Mexican government over land claim and political rights (McPherson and Hogue, 2010). After the loss at the Alamo and eventual win
at the Battle of San Jacinto in 1836, Texas won their independence from Mexico (McPherson and Hogue, 2010). Much like the bickering of the
Confederate south, the Polk administration was bent on acquiring land and expanding after the Mexican–American War. Congress, in 1847, eventually
saw this acquiring of states as unconstitutional and that the Mexican–American ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
territory could prohibit slavery despite the recent ruling of U.S. Supreme Court's Dred Scott Case. After spawning great debate from the ruling, the
Illinois Senate race between Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas sought to divide political sides on the question of decision's guarantying that slave
owners could take slaves into a territory without losing their slaves (Levin, 2010). Through the Freeport Doctrine we saw the Lincoln–Douglass
Debates explore the stance from the Democratic Douglas who insisted that slavery expansion was a local issue and should be decided by indigenous
populations (Levin, 2010). Abraham Lincoln then alienated Southern Democrats, through the debates, who were pushing for a territorial slave code
and annoyed Northern Democrats who were opposed to slavery on moral grounds (Levin, 2010). The debates set up his stage for Senate nomination and
eventual presidential run. The Scott Case, Freeport Doctrine and Lincoln–Douglass debates separated the parties in Congress and fueled the
underlining tension of North and South stances for the upcoming Civil

Walt Whitman: Sexuality Debate Essay examples
Walt Whitman: Sexuality Debate
The debate of one's sexuality has more commonly come into the picture of American society towards the very end of the 19th century. A captious
discussion is the lifestyle of Walt Whitman: American poet, essayist and journalist. Though modern critics tend to debate his sexuality, there is great
disagreement as to whether Whitman ever had sexual relations with men, expressed alongside his poetry. Walt Whitman was born on Long Island on
May 31st, 1819, just thirty years after George Washington was inaugurated as the first president of the newly formedUnited States of America.
Whitman published his poem "Beat! Beat! Drums!" as a patriotic rally call for the North. In 17th century America, it is a ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
In I Sing the Body Electric the expressive subject chants: Have you ever loved the body of a woman? Have you ever loved the body of a man? Do you
not see that these are exactly the same to all in all nations and times all over the earth?
This seems to prove Whitman's bisexual and/ or heterosexual nature, and that is why it would be wrong to categorize him as homosexual only.
Though Leaves of Grass was often labeled pornographic, only one critic, Refus Wilmot Griswold, remarked its author's presumed sexual activity,
suggesting Whitman was guilty of "that horrible sin not to be mentioned among Christians". Peter Doyle may be the most likely to be classified as
Whitman's first male partner. Doyle met Whitman around 1866 when Doyle was a bus conductor. Interviewed in 1895, Doyle said: "We were familiar
at once– I put my hand on his knee– we understood. He did not get out at the end of the trip– in fact went all the way back with me". A more direct
account came from Oscar Wilde, who met Whitman in 1882, boasting "I have the kiss of Walt Whitman still on my lips". Another possible lover was
Bill Duckett, a teenage boy who lived on the same street and later moved in with Whitman, who described their friendship as "thick". Yet another
intense relationship with a young man was Harry, Stafford, whose family he stayed with at Timber Creek. Whitman gave Stafford a ring which
Stafford wrote back "You know

Civil War Began in 1787?
Civil war began in 1787?
Though the Civil War itself did not begin in 1787, many events from that point lead up to it. Such events like the creation of the "Northwest Ordinance
of 1787". The Northwest Ordinance of 1787 was a system of government for the territory North of Ohio. In these territories slavery would be prohibited.
While in the south cotton was becoming very profitable after the invention of the cotton gin in 1793. The southern economy depended solely on cotton
production. They needed cheap labor, which meant a lot of slaves. Northern economy was based more on industries rather than agriculture. The north
industry would buy the raw cotton and turn into finished goods. So since the south was based on a plantation system ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Compromise of 1850 was created by Henry Clay and others to deal with the balance between slave and Free states, northern and southern interest. One
of the provisions was the Fugitive Slave Act. All runaway slaves were, upon capture, to be returned to their masters.
In 1852 Harriet Beecher Stowe published "Uncle Tom 's Cabin". Sympathy began for the abolitionists and against slavery and slave holders.
In 1854 the Nebraska Act created two new territories that would allow the states to use popular sovereignty to determine whether they would free or
slave. The real issues were in Kansas where proslavery Missourians began to pour into the state to help force it to be slave. These "Border Ruffians"
caused a fight in Lawrence called "bleeding Kansas"
John Brown was a white man who hated slavery. He was very religious and thought slavery was against what the bible says. He was a mean and
violent man. He thought that the only way to end slavery was with violence. On October 10, 1856 John Brown and group of black and white people,
including his sons, rode into the small village in Virginia. The village name was Harper 's Ferry. They had lots of weapons and stole even more. They
attacked people at railroad station and took some of them hostage. The people in town fought back

The Wilmot Proviso And The Mexican War
The Wilmot Proviso Before 1846 and the Mexican War, the status of slavery in every part of the U.S. had been settled by state law or the Missouri
Compromise. The acquisition of new land from Mexico reopened the question of the expansion of slavery. In 1847 Congressman David Wilmot of
Pennsylvania proposed a resolution prohibiting slavery in all the territories acquired from Mexico. Democrat and Whig alike supported "The Wilmot
Proviso", and nearly all southerners opposed it. It passed the House, which was more populated by Northerners but it failed in the Senate where there
was an even balance of free and slave states. Later in 1848, supporters of Wilmot's idea of opposition to the expansion of slavery formed the Free Soil
Party. Fourteenth Amendment After the passing of the Civil Rights Bill over presidential veto in 1866, Congress proceeded to adopt its own plan of
Reconstruction and in June of the same year it approved the Fourteenth Amendment.... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Andrew Carnegie, originally from Scotland, took advantage of the time and created a vertically integrated steel company. Being a vertically integrated
company meant he controlled every phase of business from the raw materials to transportation, manufacturing, and distribution of steel. He was a
dictator in his company and his factories operated non–stop everyday except for the fourth of July. He believed that the rich had a moral obligation to
advance society and he distributed a lot of his money to philanthropies like the creation of public libraries in towns throughout the country. He was
seen as a captain of the industry and inspired Americans to become industrial leaders. He was also seen as a "robber baron" because of his dictatorial
attitudes, repressive labor, and domination of power and

Mexican-American War Dbq
The Mexican–American war started because of border disputes, after the annexation of Texas to the United States. The US and Mexico disputed where
the border of the two countries was; therefore, causing the war. Historically, the Mexican–American War, which occurred 1846–1848, affected slavery
because of events such as the Wilmot Proviso, Sectionalism, Manifest Destiny, and the Treaty of Guadalupe. Slavery was affected in these ways
because of lands added to the United States, so the balance of slave states to free states had possibilities of becoming unbalanced.
Before the war, Manifest Destiny was always a widely spread topic. Manifest Destiny was the belief that white people have a God–given right to
expand from the Atlantic Ocean to ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The Treaty of Guadalupe added lands to the United States and Sectionalism split the country; they were both related to the Mexican–American war in
some way. Since these two items caused Bleeding Kansas, Bleeding Kansas can be traced years back to the Mexican–American war. In 1854 the
Kansas Nebraska act was the boundary between free territory and slave territory. Kansas had to become either a slave state or a free state. A sequence
of violent events occurred involving abolitionists and pro–slavery believers. These events took place in the Kansas territory where both pro–slavery
and anti–slavery constitutions competed. This dispute further strained the North, South, and West, making sectionalism more extreme and the country
split further apart. If Sectionalism and the Treaty of Guadalupe were caused by the Mexican American war, and Sectionalism and the Treaty of
Guadalupe caused Bleeding Kansas, it can be inferred that Bleeding Kansas was one of the causes of the American Civil War. All these items kept
boiling up until they had to explode with the Civil War.
All of this can be related to World War 2. Everything kept adding up to the start of the war. Hitler was taking over Germany and abrupting peace with
other countries. Countries are all declaring war on Germany. Many years before Germany's wrongdoings, Japan was trying to expand and invade parts
of Asia. Japan

Increased Sectional Tension between the Notrht and the South
Increased Sectional Tension Between the North and the South Between 1840 and 1860, the issue of slavery was in the spotlight of American politics.
With the nation's westward expansion, whether slavery should be allowed in new territories provoked a series of fierce debates between the northern
free states and the southern slave states. Witnessed by the Wilmot Proviso of 1846, the publication of Uncle Tom's Cabin in 1852, and the
Kansas–Nebraska Act of 1854, the sectional tension was continually intensified. Despite the fact that the Wilmot Proviso failed in the Senate, it
politicized the issue of slavery in the territories. Since the United States gained a large amount of land as a result of the victory over Mexico, the
westward expansion of slavery became a major concern. Hoping to settle this problem once and for all, David Wilmot from Pennsylvania proposed
Wilmot Proviso, which stated that no slavery would be allowed in territory acquired from Mexico, because Mexico had abolished slavery when it
gained this land from Spain, and slavery should not be replanted. However, this proposal evoked furious debate. On one hand, intending to protect
slavery, senator John C. Calhoun from South Carolina made the Fifth Amendment argument that Congress had no right to prevent any citizens from
taking their properties into territories. In this case, prohibiting southerners from taking their slaves into new western territories would be a violation of
the Fifth Amendment. On the other

Second Earl Of Rochester Essay

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Joy Smith

More from Joy Smith (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Second Earl Of Rochester Essay