It was morally wrong, cruel, and violated the principles of democracy.
Reasons other than morals, as previously stated, many people were racist at that time (yes the north too) and they felt like slaves were taking jobs away from whites in the South as slaves were cheaper. Also, tensions kept building up between the sections that some just flat out became anti-southern.
On a side note, the North was more of an opposition to the EXPANSION of slavery rather than it just it being in the South. Slavery was becoming a dying institution as only 25% of Southerners owned Slaves by 1860.
Actually, only a small fragment of the north and to a degree a small fragment of the south was strictly against slavery. These people were called abolitionist. After Abraham Lincoln was elected president there was a fear amongst many southerners that their rights would be infringed upon. They did not want the federal government to tell them what to do. The northern states had more population so these states had more say so in how the federal government was run. Because of this some southern states decided to leave the Union. The north did not like this because this and Lincoln began to raise an army to prevent the southern states from leaving thus the war began. It wasn't until Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation, freeing the slaves, at a later stage in the war that the conflict began to be viewed more as a fight to free slaves and less as a fight to preserve the Union. A little known fact is the Emancipation Proclamation only freed the slaves in the south, not in the slaveholding northern states. Those slaves were not freed until shortly after the war.
The people in the north were not any more against slavery than the south because the north used slaves for industrial production. The state of deleware even had slaves for years after the civil war.
Because slavery is bad...
because slaves would take over their jobs
No. North wanted to end slavery and south wanted slavery
Slavery disappeared in the north because they used more factories and they were based on industry rather than agriculture like in the south
not as harsh as it was in the south. they did not have to work for life like saves in the south had to.
No, slavery was mostly based in West, North, Central and East Africa. There is no history of slavery in Southern African countries like Zimbabwe.
In the North they did not want Slavery , and in the South they wanted to be apart of Slavery ,
It was not as accepted in the north, and was not as important in the economy, as for the south, without slavery there economy would fail.
they did not like slavery, and they had manufactures
No. North wanted to end slavery and south wanted slavery
the north did. the south had slavery, the north did not.
Slavery disappeared in the north because they used more factories and they were based on industry rather than agriculture like in the south
the north had little or no need for slavery because of there geography. agriculture did not revolve around slavery. this not saying that slaves could not be used but in this society they are not as excepted in the north as in the south. without slavery, the south's economy would be drastically different. the north already had ajusted to no slavery. people like to stay with status quo.
The north wanted to eliminate slavery not for the beauty of the eyes of slaves but because the north was an industrial place, not like the agricultural south. The north wanted just to protect the union .
The answer is north. North is against slavery.
slavery was not the same everywhere in the world because they had different parts like the north and south. The north was treated better then the south
not as harsh as it was in the south. they did not have to work for life like saves in the south had to.
No, slavery was mostly based in West, North, Central and East Africa. There is no history of slavery in Southern African countries like Zimbabwe.
No- not all Southerners were pro-slavery, just like not all Northerners were anti-slavery.