Division between north and south

There has always been a division between the north and the south. Their division has long been due to the issue of slavery. The issue grew even more as a problem as the nation grew in the 19th century. As new territories entered the union, the question and fight between the north and the south of whether they should enter the union as slave or free states grew them apart. Their views on issuesrevolving around the country portray their stance on slavery and their divisions. An analysis of The Liberator and the Daily South Carolinian reveals the two distinctive views of both the north and the south on the annexation of Cuba; whether admitting to the union as a free state or as a slave state and paramount to the interests of the south, and give stability to the system of slavery.
Theconstitution was drafted and signed by the founding fathers in order to establish the union under a solid government. The north and the south portray the constitution differently. The Liberator viewed the constitution as a sacred instrument to abolish slavery. The northern states especially used the Bill of Rights as a form to show this, they wanted to keep them and hold on to them. The Liberator’sapproach to the constitution is a more analytical one in comparison to the south’s approach. When the constitution says, “We are all created equal,” they include everyone in it, as well as blacks. The Daily South Carolinian takes a more literal approach in terms of interpreting the constitution. It claims that the constitution does not abolish slavery therefore it is legal. When the southinterprets, “we are all created equal,” they read all white men are created equal. These views create the division among slave issues. The Liberator claims slavery is a life-sucking vampire that will lead to the destruction of the federal government. It also states that freedom has been sacrificed by the evils of slavery. The Liberator says, “Freedom has been betrayed and sacrificed. Its gates have beenthrown open by foul treachery, the invader has entered and revels in his spoils.”[1] Whereas the Daily South Carolinian claims northerners are traitors and abolitionists destroy peace. The Daily South Carolinian says, “They are enemies of their country, and enemies of their race.”[2] Both papers have different views on runaway slaves.
Ways of how runaway slaves are to be treated are seendifferently between both papers. The Daily South Carolinian portrays how the south is against the north freeing their fugitives. There is one case of a fugitive slave that is repeated between the two papers. Burns appears many times in both papers. The Daily South Carolinian says, “Boston must redeem herself of the stain for allowing him to be carried back; and concluded by reiterating his caution to keephis eye on them.”[3] The Liberator is for protecting state rights so they can free fugitive slaves. Commissioners have declined to act upon cases of fugitive slaves because they do not approve of the law that sends fugitives back to the owner. The Liberator says, “We are requested to state that the report that George T. Curtis, Esq., has declined to act as United States Commissioner in casesarising under that act for the surrender of fugitives is without foundation.”[4] When Boston freed a slave the south felt very strongly about it, and the Daily South Carolinian had no problem in portraying it. The Daily South Carolinian says, “in the boasted intelligence of Boston; its religious, moral, and charitable institutions; that untrammeled expression of opinion; treason by senators, ministersof the gospel, strong-minded women, to the lowest debased mobocracy that was ever summoned to execute the designs of fanaticism.” [5] through runaway slaves it is easily viewed the stance that the north and the south hold concerning slavery.
The annexation of Cuba is something in which both sides agree on. They both think that it is important to take Cuba in order to fulfill the manifest...