Analysis Of The South Scorns: Against Mrs. Stowe

1724 Words7 Pages
Hao Nguyen Period 3 December 22, 2014 APUSH Readings Chapter 19 1) A-2 2) The South Scorns Mrs. Stowe (1852) 3) Author: Southern Literary Messenger of Richmond 4) Author’s Position: Against Mrs. Stowe’s tale 5) Bias: They were from the South so they opposed this story because the Northern abolitionists supported it. They were also critics who wants to stand up for their people beliefs 6) Arguments: * We shouldn’t put emphasis on the abolition actions since they don’t deserve it * The abolition attacks has spread to other countries * The abolitionists and Mrs. Stowe’s tale has influenced the minds of the people that knows nothing about slavery to only think about its negative effects * The tale…show more content…
For instance, the writer claims that the book Uncle Tom’s Cabin and its common predecessor who attacks the topic of slavery in order for the abolitionists to unite together and fight for the same beliefs, isn’t fair or moral since they were disrupting the peaceful state that the U.S was in and shifting the people apart even more. On the other hand, the other passage written by the Southern literary messenger of Richmond also opposed Mrs. Stowe;s tale but he/she had a very biased opinion towards the South so he/she just argued using his/her untrustworthy opinion and very little knowledge. For example, the messenger didn’t think that the author of the story should have put emphasis on the abolition actions since they didn’t deserve the attention and it was unfair for the South since they their opinions didn’t get noticed. 1) C-1 2) The Pro-Southern Court Speaks (1857) 3) Author: Roger Taney 4) Author’s Position: Against Dred Scott and his wish to become a free African American 5) Bias: The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court has the authority to speak for what he favors and in this case, his bias leaned toward the South so he supported them by going against Dred Scott. The Court also must cancel the Missouri Compromise since it goes against the constitution so they couldn’t…show more content…
Even though Brown thought that performing viciousness actions such as organizing a rebellion for abolitionists was the only ways that can help slaves gain their own freedom, he only executed the errors of a passionate anti-slavery person. In addition, John Brown was a firm believer in anti-slavery so his only intention was to free all of the slaves using violence for good purposes. Moreover, he wasn’t trying to perform a crime and his action shows that he wasn’t a felon since his deed wasn’t for the pursuit of selfish fulfillment nor was it in disregard’s of other people’s feelings. For instance, john Brown risked his own life and even his family lives so the slaves can find their happiness and peace. He also performed these good deeds knowing that it won’t benefit him at all which shows us his heroic characteristics such as being brave and courages. Furthermore, I support Greeley’s claims because he considered including all of the wrongdoings in Brown’s felony while praising Brown’s brave attempt to get rid of slavery so both slavery supporters and abolitionists can relate to his position. On the other hand, Abraham
Open Document