Slavery in the North

In 1806, 9-year-old Isabella Baumfree and her family lived on the property of Charles Ardinburgh of Ulster County in New York. When Ardinburgh died, Isabella found her mother in tears.

"Mau-mau, what makes you cry?" Isabella asked.

"Oh, my child, I am thinking of your brothers and sisters that have been sold away from me," her mother replied.

Soon after, Isabella too was separated from her mother. She was auctioned-along with other slaves, horses, and cattle-and purchased for $100. She was sold again and again, from master to master, until she was emancipated in 1828.

Students of history know Isabella better by the name she chose as an adult-Sojourner Truth. Truth was an abolitionist. She spoke out against slavery. But what some people may not know is that Truth was one of thousands of slaves who were bought, sold, and forced to do labor in the North.

"Many people are surprised when you talk about slavery in the North," Alan Singer, a professor of education at Hofstra University, told Senior Edition. "We associate slavery with the South, even though the biggest importer of slaves-after South Carolina-was New York City."

Historians are beginning to bring slavery in the North into the spotlight. The New York Historical Society recently presented an exhibition on slavery in that state. Singer, who travels the country to talk to students about slavery in the North, wants people to remember that slavery was a national institution.

The slave trade helped finance the Industrial Revolution in many major Northern cities, such as Boston and New York City. The Industrial Revolution was a period of rapid growth in the use of machinery in the early 1800s. Many U.S. businesses got their start with profits from slave-produced goods and the slave trade.

It's important to understand how slavery affected the entire country, because its effects linger through discrimination, Singer says. "Kids see slavery as something that happened in the deep past," he told Senior Edition. "I want children to know that we still live with the effects of that slavery society."

According to the passage, what was one effect of slavery in many major Northern cities?

Slavery in the North

In 1806, 9-year-old Isabella Baumfree and her family lived on the property of Charles Ardinburgh of Ulster County in New York. When Ardinburgh died, Isabella found her mother in tears.

"Mau-mau, what makes you cry?" Isabella asked.

"Oh, my child, I am thinking of your brothers and sisters that have been sold away from me," her mother replied.

Soon after, Isabella too was separated from her mother. She was auctioned-along with other slaves, horses, and cattle-and purchased for $100. She was sold again and again, from master to master, until she was emancipated in 1828.

Students of history know Isabella better by the name she chose as an adult-Sojourner Truth. Truth was an abolitionist. She spoke out against slavery. But what some people may not know is that Truth was one of thousands of slaves who were bought, sold, and forced to do labor in the North.

"Many people are surprised when you talk about slavery in the North," Alan Singer, a professor of education at Hofstra University, told Senior Edition. "We associate slavery with the South, even though the biggest importer of slaves-after South Carolina-was New York City."

Historians are beginning to bring slavery in the North into the spotlight. The New York Historical Society recently presented an exhibition on slavery in that state. Singer, who travels the country to talk to students about slavery in the North, wants people to remember that slavery was a national institution.

The slave trade helped finance the Industrial Revolution in many major Northern cities, such as Boston and New York City. The Industrial Revolution was a period of rapid growth in the use of machinery in the early 1800s. Many U.S. businesses got their start with profits from slave-produced goods and the slave trade.

It's important to understand how slavery affected the entire country, because its effects linger through discrimination, Singer says. "Kids see slavery as something that happened in the deep past," he told Senior Edition. "I want children to know that we still live with the effects of that slavery society."

Historians are trying to draw attention to slavery in the North. What evidence from the passage best supports this statement?

Slavery in the North

In 1806, 9-year-old Isabella Baumfree and her family lived on the property of Charles Ardinburgh of Ulster County in New York. When Ardinburgh died, Isabella found her mother in tears.

"Mau-mau, what makes you cry?" Isabella asked.

"Oh, my child, I am thinking of your brothers and sisters that have been sold away from me," her mother replied.

Soon after, Isabella too was separated from her mother. She was auctioned-along with other slaves, horses, and cattle-and purchased for $100. She was sold again and again, from master to master, until she was emancipated in 1828.

Students of history know Isabella better by the name she chose as an adult-Sojourner Truth. Truth was an abolitionist. She spoke out against slavery. But what some people may not know is that Truth was one of thousands of slaves who were bought, sold, and forced to do labor in the North.

"Many people are surprised when you talk about slavery in the North," Alan Singer, a professor of education at Hofstra University, told Senior Edition. "We associate slavery with the South, even though the biggest importer of slaves-after South Carolina-was New York City."

Historians are beginning to bring slavery in the North into the spotlight. The New York Historical Society recently presented an exhibition on slavery in that state. Singer, who travels the country to talk to students about slavery in the North, wants people to remember that slavery was a national institution.

The slave trade helped finance the Industrial Revolution in many major Northern cities, such as Boston and New York City. The Industrial Revolution was a period of rapid growth in the use of machinery in the early 1800s. Many U.S. businesses got their start with profits from slave-produced goods and the slave trade.

It's important to understand how slavery affected the entire country, because its effects linger through discrimination, Singer says. "Kids see slavery as something that happened in the deep past," he told Senior Edition. "I want children to know that we still live with the effects of that slavery society."

What can you conclude about Sojourner Truth after reading the passage?

Slavery in the North

In 1806, 9-year-old Isabella Baumfree and her family lived on the property of Charles Ardinburgh of Ulster County in New York. When Ardinburgh died, Isabella found her mother in tears.

"Mau-mau, what makes you cry?" Isabella asked.

"Oh, my child, I am thinking of your brothers and sisters that have been sold away from me," her mother replied.

Soon after, Isabella too was separated from her mother. She was auctioned-along with other slaves, horses, and cattle-and purchased for $100. She was sold again and again, from master to master, until she was emancipated in 1828.

Students of history know Isabella better by the name she chose as an adult-Sojourner Truth. Truth was an abolitionist. She spoke out against slavery. But what some people may not know is that Truth was one of thousands of slaves who were bought, sold, and forced to do labor in the North.

"Many people are surprised when you talk about slavery in the North," Alan Singer, a professor of education at Hofstra University, told Senior Edition. "We associate slavery with the South, even though the biggest importer of slaves-after South Carolina-was New York City."

Historians are beginning to bring slavery in the North into the spotlight. The New York Historical Society recently presented an exhibition on slavery in that state. Singer, who travels the country to talk to students about slavery in the North, wants people to remember that slavery was a national institution.

The slave trade helped finance the Industrial Revolution in many major Northern cities, such as Boston and New York City. The Industrial Revolution was a period of rapid growth in the use of machinery in the early 1800s. Many U.S. businesses got their start with profits from slave-produced goods and the slave trade.

It's important to understand how slavery affected the entire country, because its effects linger through discrimination, Singer says. "Kids see slavery as something that happened in the deep past," he told Senior Edition. "I want children to know that we still live with the effects of that slavery society."

What is the main idea of this passage?

Read this sentence from the passage: "We associate slavery with the South, even though the biggest importer of slaves-after South Carolina-was New York City."

As used in this sentence, what does the word "associate" mean?

A Tale of Segregation: Fetching Water

The memory of a traumatic childhood incident near his hometown of Spiro, Oklahoma, still brings tears to the eyes of William Minner . . .

We had stopped at a spring. It was a very popular place that both blacks and whites would go to get water. We had waited there for about 30 minutes. But the people ahead of us, they were all white. When we had reached our turn, two white men grabbed my dad. They told him that he'd have to wait until all of the white people were finished. Dad said, "We'll get our water another day or we'll come back." They wouldn't let my dad leave. They said, "You're going to stay here, and when all of the good white people have gotten their water, and when everyone is gone, then you can do what you want to." When all the white people finished getting their water, Dad got his water. I remember him telling me, "What you saw there was real hatred and prejudice. But this is not going to be forever . . . there's gonna come a day when this won't be anymore."

Why did William Minner and his father go to the spring?

A Tale of Segregation: Fetching Water

The memory of a traumatic childhood incident near his hometown of Spiro, Oklahoma, still brings tears to the eyes of William Minner . . .

We had stopped at a spring. It was a very popular place that both blacks and whites would go to get water. We had waited there for about 30 minutes. But the people ahead of us, they were all white. When we had reached our turn, two white men grabbed my dad. They told him that he'd have to wait until all of the white people were finished. Dad said, "We'll get our water another day or we'll come back." They wouldn't let my dad leave. They said, "You're going to stay here, and when all of the good white people have gotten their water, and when everyone is gone, then you can do what you want to." When all the white people finished getting their water, Dad got his water. I remember him telling me, "What you saw there was real hatred and prejudice. But this is not going to be forever . . . there's gonna come a day when this won't be anymore."

What does the author describe in the passage?

A Tale of Segregation: Fetching Water

The memory of a traumatic childhood incident near his hometown of Spiro, Oklahoma, still brings tears to the eyes of William Minner . . .

We had stopped at a spring. It was a very popular place that both blacks and whites would go to get water. We had waited there for about 30 minutes. But the people ahead of us, they were all white. When we had reached our turn, two white men grabbed my dad. They told him that he'd have to wait until all of the white people were finished. Dad said, "We'll get our water another day or we'll come back." They wouldn't let my dad leave. They said, "You're going to stay here, and when all of the good white people have gotten their water, and when everyone is gone, then you can do what you want to." When all the white people finished getting their water, Dad got his water. I remember him telling me, "What you saw there was real hatred and prejudice. But this is not going to be forever . . . there's gonna come a day when this won't be anymore."

William and his father had been waiting for a long time when they were stopped by two white men. What evidence from the passage supports this conclusion?

A Tale of Segregation: Fetching Water

The memory of a traumatic childhood incident near his hometown of Spiro, Oklahoma, still brings tears to the eyes of William Minner . . .

We had stopped at a spring. It was a very popular place that both blacks and whites would go to get water. We had waited there for about 30 minutes. But the people ahead of us, they were all white. When we had reached our turn, two white men grabbed my dad. They told him that he'd have to wait until all of the white people were finished. Dad said, "We'll get our water another day or we'll come back." They wouldn't let my dad leave. They said, "You're going to stay here, and when all of the good white people have gotten their water, and when everyone is gone, then you can do what you want to." When all the white people finished getting their water, Dad got his water. I remember him telling me, "What you saw there was real hatred and prejudice. But this is not going to be forever . . . there's gonna come a day when this won't be anymore."

Why did the two white men make William and his father wait?

A Tale of Segregation: Fetching Water

The memory of a traumatic childhood incident near his hometown of Spiro, Oklahoma, still brings tears to the eyes of William Minner . . .

We had stopped at a spring. It was a very popular place that both blacks and whites would go to get water. We had waited there for about 30 minutes. But the people ahead of us, they were all white. When we had reached our turn, two white men grabbed my dad. They told him that he'd have to wait until all of the white people were finished. Dad said, "We'll get our water another day or we'll come back." They wouldn't let my dad leave. They said, "You're going to stay here, and when all of the good white people have gotten their water, and when everyone is gone, then you can do what you want to." When all the white people finished getting their water, Dad got his water. I remember him telling me, "What you saw there was real hatred and prejudice. But this is not going to be forever . . . there's gonna come a day when this won't be anymore."

What is this passage mostly about?

A Tale of Segregation: Fetching Water

The memory of a traumatic childhood incident near his hometown of Spiro, Oklahoma, still brings tears to the eyes of William Minner . . .

We had stopped at a spring. It was a very popular place that both blacks and whites would go to get water. We had waited there for about 30 minutes. But the people ahead of us, they were all white. When we had reached our turn, two white men grabbed my dad. They told him that he'd have to wait until all of the white people were finished. Dad said, "We'll get our water another day or we'll come back." They wouldn't let my dad leave. They said, "You're going to stay here, and when all of the good white people have gotten their water, and when everyone is gone, then you can do what you want to." When all the white people finished getting their water, Dad got his water. I remember him telling me, "What you saw there was real hatred and prejudice. But this is not going to be forever . . . there's gonna come a day when this won't be anymore."

Read the following sentence: "The memory of a traumatic childhood incident near his hometown of Spiro, Oklahoma, still brings tears to the eyes of William Minner . . ."

Why does the author begin the passage with this sentence?

Slavery, the Civil War, and Reconstruction: Slavery in the Territories

Before the Civil War, the nation was already divided. The country was divided over the issue of slavery. In the North, there were fewer slaves than in the South. There were mostly shops and industries that did not need slave labor in the North. In the South, large plantation owners kept many slaves to work the fields and even serve in the houses. So why couldn't the North and the South just agree to be different?

Slavery became a moral issue. More and more Northerners were against the idea of owning people as if they were property. At first they let slavery continue in the South. But in 1860 America was growing. People were moving west to new territories. As the territories gained more and more people, they could ask to be an official state of the United States of America. Would these new states allow slavery? In answer to this question, Northerners yelled "NO!" But Southerners yelled, "YES!"

There were many fights in Congress about slavery in the territories. At first, Congress made a compromise (the Missouri Compromise of 1820). They decided to keep a balance. All territories below the line of latitude 36°30' would be slave states, like the southern states that were their neighbors. All states above 36°30' would be free. No slavery would be allowed in these states.

But the compromise did not work for long. Senators needed another idea to keep the balance of slave states and free states. They decided to let people in the territories vote to decide for themselves whether or not they would be free. The voting idea was a disaster. On the night before the vote that would determine whether Kansas would be a free state or a slave state, thousands of men from Missouri spent the night in Kansas. These men wanted Kansas to have slavery, so they sneaked in to vote. Northerners called these men "border ruffians." The next day, they voted. They did not really live there, so their votes should not have counted. When the results came back, Kansas was voted a slave state.

The United States government did nothing to stop the madness, but there was a new fight over slavery in the United States Senate. One day a Senator from Massachusetts, Charles Sumner, stood on the Senate floor and gave a long, heated speech about the morality of the North and the evil injustice of the South. He said that Southerners were all horrible and devilish. He was especially mad at southern Senators, including Andrew Butler from South Carolina. Two days later Senator Butler's cousin showed up in the Senate. His name was Preston Brooks. Brooks took his cane and started beating Charles Sumner over the head! A fight had broken out on the Senate floor! Sumner was badly hurt. Northerners called him a hero. But Southerners were proud of the way Brooks defended their ideas. The division had already begun. It was only a matter of time before the southern Senators would leave Washington, D.C., and make their own country in the South.

Where did many slaves work in the South?

Slavery, the Civil War, and Reconstruction: Slavery in the Territories

Before the Civil War, the nation was already divided. The country was divided over the issue of slavery. In the North, there were fewer slaves than in the South. There were mostly shops and industries that did not need slave labor in the North. In the South, large plantation owners kept many slaves to work the fields and even serve in the houses. So why couldn't the North and the South just agree to be different?

Slavery became a moral issue. More and more Northerners were against the idea of owning people as if they were property. At first they let slavery continue in the South. But in 1860 America was growing. People were moving west to new territories. As the territories gained more and more people, they could ask to be an official state of the United States of America. Would these new states allow slavery? In answer to this question, Northerners yelled "NO!" But Southerners yelled, "YES!"

There were many fights in Congress about slavery in the territories. At first, Congress made a compromise (the Missouri Compromise of 1820). They decided to keep a balance. All territories below the line of latitude 36°30' would be slave states, like the southern states that were their neighbors. All states above 36°30' would be free. No slavery would be allowed in these states.

But the compromise did not work for long. Senators needed another idea to keep the balance of slave states and free states. They decided to let people in the territories vote to decide for themselves whether or not they would be free. The voting idea was a disaster. On the night before the vote that would determine whether Kansas would be a free state or a slave state, thousands of men from Missouri spent the night in Kansas. These men wanted Kansas to have slavery, so they sneaked in to vote. Northerners called these men "border ruffians." The next day, they voted. They did not really live there, so their votes should not have counted. When the results came back, Kansas was voted a slave state.

The United States government did nothing to stop the madness, but there was a new fight over slavery in the United States Senate. One day a Senator from Massachusetts, Charles Sumner, stood on the Senate floor and gave a long, heated speech about the morality of the North and the evil injustice of the South. He said that Southerners were all horrible and devilish. He was especially mad at southern Senators, including Andrew Butler from South Carolina. Two days later Senator Butler's cousin showed up in the Senate. His name was Preston Brooks. Brooks took his cane and started beating Charles Sumner over the head! A fight had broken out on the Senate floor! Sumner was badly hurt. Northerners called him a hero. But Southerners were proud of the way Brooks defended their ideas. The division had already begun. It was only a matter of time before the southern Senators would leave Washington, D.C., and make their own country in the South.

What problem did the Missouri Compromise try to solve?

Slavery, the Civil War, and Reconstruction: Slavery in the Territories

Before the Civil War, the nation was already divided. The country was divided over the issue of slavery. In the North, there were fewer slaves than in the South. There were mostly shops and industries that did not need slave labor in the North. In the South, large plantation owners kept many slaves to work the fields and even serve in the houses. So why couldn't the North and the South just agree to be different?

Slavery became a moral issue. More and more Northerners were against the idea of owning people as if they were property. At first they let slavery continue in the South. But in 1860 America was growing. People were moving west to new territories. As the territories gained more and more people, they could ask to be an official state of the United States of America. Would these new states allow slavery? In answer to this question, Northerners yelled "NO!" But Southerners yelled, "YES!"

There were many fights in Congress about slavery in the territories. At first, Congress made a compromise (the Missouri Compromise of 1820). They decided to keep a balance. All territories below the line of latitude 36°30' would be slave states, like the southern states that were their neighbors. All states above 36°30' would be free. No slavery would be allowed in these states.

But the compromise did not work for long. Senators needed another idea to keep the balance of slave states and free states. They decided to let people in the territories vote to decide for themselves whether or not they would be free. The voting idea was a disaster. On the night before the vote that would determine whether Kansas would be a free state or a slave state, thousands of men from Missouri spent the night in Kansas. These men wanted Kansas to have slavery, so they sneaked in to vote. Northerners called these men "border ruffians." The next day, they voted. They did not really live there, so their votes should not have counted. When the results came back, Kansas was voted a slave state.

The United States government did nothing to stop the madness, but there was a new fight over slavery in the United States Senate. One day a Senator from Massachusetts, Charles Sumner, stood on the Senate floor and gave a long, heated speech about the morality of the North and the evil injustice of the South. He said that Southerners were all horrible and devilish. He was especially mad at southern Senators, including Andrew Butler from South Carolina. Two days later Senator Butler's cousin showed up in the Senate. His name was Preston Brooks. Brooks took his cane and started beating Charles Sumner over the head! A fight had broken out on the Senate floor! Sumner was badly hurt. Northerners called him a hero. But Southerners were proud of the way Brooks defended their ideas. The division had already begun. It was only a matter of time before the southern Senators would leave Washington, D.C., and make their own country in the South.

Allowing territories to vote on whether they would be free or slave states was a disaster. What evidence from the passage supports this conclusion?

Slavery, the Civil War, and Reconstruction: Slavery in the Territories

Before the Civil War, the nation was already divided. The country was divided over the issue of slavery. In the North, there were fewer slaves than in the South. There were mostly shops and industries that did not need slave labor in the North. In the South, large plantation owners kept many slaves to work the fields and even serve in the houses. So why couldn't the North and the South just agree to be different?

Slavery became a moral issue. More and more Northerners were against the idea of owning people as if they were property. At first they let slavery continue in the South. But in 1860 America was growing. People were moving west to new territories. As the territories gained more and more people, they could ask to be an official state of the United States of America. Would these new states allow slavery? In answer to this question, Northerners yelled "NO!" But Southerners yelled, "YES!"

There were many fights in Congress about slavery in the territories. At first, Congress made a compromise (the Missouri Compromise of 1820). They decided to keep a balance. All territories below the line of latitude 36°30' would be slave states, like the southern states that were their neighbors. All states above 36°30' would be free. No slavery would be allowed in these states.

But the compromise did not work for long. Senators needed another idea to keep the balance of slave states and free states. They decided to let people in the territories vote to decide for themselves whether or not they would be free. The voting idea was a disaster. On the night before the vote that would determine whether Kansas would be a free state or a slave state, thousands of men from Missouri spent the night in Kansas. These men wanted Kansas to have slavery, so they sneaked in to vote. Northerners called these men "border ruffians." The next day, they voted. They did not really live there, so their votes should not have counted. When the results came back, Kansas was voted a slave state.

The United States government did nothing to stop the madness, but there was a new fight over slavery in the United States Senate. One day a Senator from Massachusetts, Charles Sumner, stood on the Senate floor and gave a long, heated speech about the morality of the North and the evil injustice of the South. He said that Southerners were all horrible and devilish. He was especially mad at southern Senators, including Andrew Butler from South Carolina. Two days later Senator Butler's cousin showed up in the Senate. His name was Preston Brooks. Brooks took his cane and started beating Charles Sumner over the head! A fight had broken out on the Senate floor! Sumner was badly hurt. Northerners called him a hero. But Southerners were proud of the way Brooks defended their ideas. The division had already begun. It was only a matter of time before the southern Senators would leave Washington, D.C., and make their own country in the South.

How might some northern Senators have felt after Charles Sumner was physically attacked in the Senate?

Slavery, the Civil War, and Reconstruction: Slavery in the Territories

Before the Civil War, the nation was already divided. The country was divided over the issue of slavery. In the North, there were fewer slaves than in the South. There were mostly shops and industries that did not need slave labor in the North. In the South, large plantation owners kept many slaves to work the fields and even serve in the houses. So why couldn't the North and the South just agree to be different?

Slavery became a moral issue. More and more Northerners were against the idea of owning people as if they were property. At first they let slavery continue in the South. But in 1860 America was growing. People were moving west to new territories. As the territories gained more and more people, they could ask to be an official state of the United States of America. Would these new states allow slavery? In answer to this question, Northerners yelled "NO!" But Southerners yelled, "YES!"

There were many fights in Congress about slavery in the territories. At first, Congress made a compromise (the Missouri Compromise of 1820). They decided to keep a balance. All territories below the line of latitude 36°30' would be slave states, like the southern states that were their neighbors. All states above 36°30' would be free. No slavery would be allowed in these states.

But the compromise did not work for long. Senators needed another idea to keep the balance of slave states and free states. They decided to let people in the territories vote to decide for themselves whether or not they would be free. The voting idea was a disaster. On the night before the vote that would determine whether Kansas would be a free state or a slave state, thousands of men from Missouri spent the night in Kansas. These men wanted Kansas to have slavery, so they sneaked in to vote. Northerners called these men "border ruffians." The next day, they voted. They did not really live there, so their votes should not have counted. When the results came back, Kansas was voted a slave state.

The United States government did nothing to stop the madness, but there was a new fight over slavery in the United States Senate. One day a Senator from Massachusetts, Charles Sumner, stood on the Senate floor and gave a long, heated speech about the morality of the North and the evil injustice of the South. He said that Southerners were all horrible and devilish. He was especially mad at southern Senators, including Andrew Butler from South Carolina. Two days later Senator Butler's cousin showed up in the Senate. His name was Preston Brooks. Brooks took his cane and started beating Charles Sumner over the head! A fight had broken out on the Senate floor! Sumner was badly hurt. Northerners called him a hero. But Southerners were proud of the way Brooks defended their ideas. The division had already begun. It was only a matter of time before the southern Senators would leave Washington, D.C., and make their own country in the South.

What is this passage mostly about?

Slavery, the Civil War, and Reconstruction: Slavery in the Territories

Before the Civil War, the nation was already divided. The country was divided over the issue of slavery. In the North, there were fewer slaves than in the South. There were mostly shops and industries that did not need slave labor in the North. In the South, large plantation owners kept many slaves to work the fields and even serve in the houses. So why couldn't the North and the South just agree to be different?

Slavery became a moral issue. More and more Northerners were against the idea of owning people as if they were property. At first they let slavery continue in the South. But in 1860 America was growing. People were moving west to new territories. As the territories gained more and more people, they could ask to be an official state of the United States of America. Would these new states allow slavery? In answer to this question, Northerners yelled "NO!" But Southerners yelled, "YES!"

There were many fights in Congress about slavery in the territories. At first, Congress made a compromise (the Missouri Compromise of 1820). They decided to keep a balance. All territories below the line of latitude 36°30' would be slave states, like the southern states that were their neighbors. All states above 36°30' would be free. No slavery would be allowed in these states.

But the compromise did not work for long. Senators needed another idea to keep the balance of slave states and free states. They decided to let people in the territories vote to decide for themselves whether or not they would be free. The voting idea was a disaster. On the night before the vote that would determine whether Kansas would be a free state or a slave state, thousands of men from Missouri spent the night in Kansas. These men wanted Kansas to have slavery, so they sneaked in to vote. Northerners called these men "border ruffians." The next day, they voted. They did not really live there, so their votes should not have counted. When the results came back, Kansas was voted a slave state.

The United States government did nothing to stop the madness, but there was a new fight over slavery in the United States Senate. One day a Senator from Massachusetts, Charles Sumner, stood on the Senate floor and gave a long, heated speech about the morality of the North and the evil injustice of the South. He said that Southerners were all horrible and devilish. He was especially mad at southern Senators, including Andrew Butler from South Carolina. Two days later Senator Butler's cousin showed up in the Senate. His name was Preston Brooks. Brooks took his cane and started beating Charles Sumner over the head! A fight had broken out on the Senate floor! Sumner was badly hurt. Northerners called him a hero. But Southerners were proud of the way Brooks defended their ideas. The division had already begun. It was only a matter of time before the southern Senators would leave Washington, D.C., and make their own country in the South.

Read the following sentences: "Slavery became a moral issue. More and more Northerners were against the idea of owning people as if they were property." What does the word "moral" mean?