Final answer:
The historical dealings with slavery in the United States were essentially delaying an inevitable confrontation between pro-slavery and anti-slavery factions, which culminated in the Civil War. Efforts such as the Compromise of 1850 sought to reconcile differences but ultimately failed to provide lasting solutions, and the irrepressible conflict over slavery inexorably led to the nation's divide.
Step-by-step explanation:
The dealings with slavery prior to the American Civil War were essentially postponing an outcome that many saw as inevitable: the conflict between a society structured around enslavement and a growing movement towards emancipation.
This tension is evident in the historical discussions of slavery's economic angle versus its moral repercussions, such as highlighted by abolitionists who criticized slavery not just for its economic inefficiency but for its inherent injustice. The increasing number of mixed-race individuals in slave states was undermining the pseudo-biblical justifications for slavery and propelling the country towards a reckoning with its 'peculiar institution.'
The notion of an irrepressible conflict, as mentioned by William H. Seward, captured the essence of the national sentiment that the Union could not exist half slave and half free, indicating that the differences between the North and South on the issue of slavery would either have to be reconciled or would lead to a break.
The Compromise of 1850 provided a temporary resolution to slavery in the territories but intensified the regional tensions, emphasizing the fundamental differences in perspectives on slavery and contributing to the eventual secession of southern states.