Ever since the formation of the colonies, differences stood in the way of a fundamental relationship between the north and the south. Despite these differences they were not the cause of the problems. In the 1820’s, the growth between territories and regions were increasing. This expansion went too far causing it to become a worldwide crisis. More chaos arouse since the north and the south did not agree on anything. The north strongly disagreed with the expansion of slavery, while south agreed to expand slavery throughout new territories and regions. The north's decision was based on factors such as political and economical threat instead of a moral threat, as it was depicted in the Missouri Compromise. However, the Compromise of 1850 , showed a more argument towards the morality threat, making it more united than ever. The Missouri Compromise had an interesting political action, It depicted the norths disagreement towards slavery was more of a political issue rather than a moral argument. In the early 19th century , the north was populated with abolitionists and radicals, those who believes in abolition. Their main aim was not to stop slavery because it was inhumane, but the fact that white people were becoming unemployed and the south were becoming more powerful. The Missouri Compromise of 1820 was a debatable decision for the north and the south. A decision towards whether or not Missouri should come in as a slave state. In congress, those on the side of the north, found out that Missouri was going to be placed as a slave state and were dramatically upset. They were upset due to the fact that it would cause an unbalance. During the 1800’s there were an equivalent of eleven slave states and eleven free states. Naturally, ... ... middle of paper ... ...as created to get slaves who run to the north back to the south, without trial of jury. The reason was that the Judge was paid to show unfairness, to side with the south rather than the suffering individual. This angered the north and their belief towards slavery, so they created another law which replaced the Fugitive Slave Law, it was called the “personal liberty” laws. The Missouri Compromise and the Compromise of 1850 were two acts that tried to solve the problems between the note and the south. However, the political action that the north took caused the creation of the “personal liberty” laws, which oddly changed north’s perspective towards slavery. The disagreement on the extension of slavery was not only the eyes of the north anymore. Although, the Compromise of 1850, put a more humane side to the solution, the problem towards slavery is yet to be solved..
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
Having slavery be a significant part of many American lives, the Missouri Compromise was another sign that slavery was still a want in new states. The change of slavery states and free states still wasn’t where it needed to be in order to be accepted by today’s standards, but there were already people rallying to get it removed. Many people were involved in the Missouri Compromise as well as affected by it, but, thankfully, none of it is still in place today.
The Missouri Compromise and the Nullification Crisis were both very noteworthy events in American history. The significance of the two not only laid in the events themselves, but also the time period in which they occurred and what they foreshadowed. In short, the Missouri Compromise was an act of Congress passed in 1820 between the two faction of United States Congress, that is, the pro-slavery faction and the anti-slavery factions. The compromise primarily involved the regulation of slavery in the western territories of the United States. Although it prohibited slavery in the Louisiana Purchase Territory north of the 36 30 degree latitude, it carved out an exception for Missouri.
First, the Missouri Compromise of 1820 established the slavery line that allowed slavery below it and forbid slavery above it. It also gave the South another slave state in Missouri and the north a free state in Maine. Although each region gained a state in the Senate, the south benefited most from the acquisition because Missouri was in such a pivotal position in the country, right on the border. Later on with the Kansas-Nebraska Act in 1854, Missouri had a big role in getting Kansas to vote south because many proslavery Missourians crossed the border into Kansas to vote slavery. The Missouri Compromise also helped slavery because the line that was formed to limit slavery had more land below the line than above it. Therefore, slavery was given more land to be slave and therefore more power in the Senate, when the territories became state. In effect, the north got the short end of the stick and the south was given the first hint of being able to push around the north. The interesting thing is, the north agreed to all these provisions that would clearly benefit the south.
Western expansion and the Louisiana Purchase both led to the formation of the Missouri Compromise because more states started applying for statehood, and this distorted the balance between the slave and free states. Division between the North and South increased as a result of the Missouri Compromise. It created a line that separated the Union and set it to the path of Civil War. At first, the North and South saw the compromise as a successful document that maintained the balance between the number of slave and free states; however, when the Union gained more territory through Mexican War, Congress decided to modify the existing compromise. Finally, the repeal of the compromise made the final push that led to the explosion of animosity between the North and South, which led to the Civil War. Slavery in the new territories remained the main issue that caused the necessity of forming the Missouri Compromise. Jefferson accurately stated that the Missouri Compromise stood only as a temporary solution that eventually led to the full-fledged sectional war between
The Kansas- Nebraska act of 1854 started the violent bloody Kansas revolt because it interfered with an already recognized agreement between the two sections. The Missouri Compromise had already established the future of America’s political map. The introduction of popular sovereignty placed the decision of whether Kansas would be slave or free in the hands of the citizen that move there. To ensure that Kansas turned to the best institution for their respective secti...
Throughout the period of Antebellum there were many compromises made regarding slavery: The ⅗ compromise in 1787, the Missouri Compromise in 1820, the Tariff of 1833, and finally the compromise. With so many agreements made between the North and the South, why was america not able to make a compromise in 1861 when the secession crisis was happening? What happened between 1787 to 1861 causing the United States to change from a country of compromising opponents to a country of fighting enemies? The answer answer is not so simple.There are a myriad of factors which resulted in the ultimate failure of compromise, but the most important ones are as follows: The imbalance of power between the North and South made it incapable for the two sides to make a compromise that would be in the southerners own self interest, disillusionment with the nature of compromisation made neither the North nor the South want to work it out, and finally the growing divide between the two regions, along with clashing political beliefs caused an animosity between them that could not be reconciled by mere compromise.
2. What was the Missouri Compromise, what did it illustrate about the future of the US?
Additionally, the majority of states had conflicts between slavery in their territory, one of them dealt with missouri. Missouri applied for admission into the Union as a slave state; this became a problem because missouri ruined the balance for free slaves and slave states. The northern states wanted to ban slavery from occurring in missouri because the unbalanced situation it put towards the other states. In response, the southern states declared how congress doesn’t have the power to ban slavery in missouri. However, Henry Clay offers a solution, the missouri compromise of 1820. Missouri admitted as slave state and Maine becomes a free slave state. Slavery is banned in Louisiana creating a 36 30 line in missouri’s southern border; this maintained the balance in the U.S senate.
In the beginning, the Missouri Compromise was actually weakening any difficult situations between the sections. The Compromise of 1820 stopped the crisis between the North and the South., when they had to decide whether the Missouri should be a free state or slave state....
... not be citizens, whether free or enslaved, many northern states had to amend their constitutions. States could no longer determine if their state was free or pro-slavery. The court had made it clear by ruling that the Missouri Compromise of 1820 was unconstitutional, and Congress could no longer interfere in determining owner’s right to property. The decision declared any line or distinction between non-slave and slave states null and void, at least officially. There was so much tension, questions, debate, anger, and confusion among citizens, laborers, states, and Congress. Thus it is not surprising that journalists and newspapers would have been swept up in the debates and allowed their political or personal biases be reflected in these reports. One thing was clear and both reports accurately predicted the ensuing agitation over slavery within the country.
Between the period of 1820-1861 there was a number of political compromises done in order reduce the sectional tension between the North and the South. While each of the compromises created helped the issue that the country was facing at that time, they did not help overall. The compromises were only a temporary fix for the country’s problem of sectionalism. Therefore while political compromises were effective in reducing the tension between the North and the South it did not help in preventing the civil war.
The Missouri Compromise was made by Congress to defuse the sectional and political rivalries caused by the request of Missouri to be admitted as a slave state in 1819. At the time, the United States consisted of twenty-two states, evenly divided between slave and free. Missouri entering as a slave state would upset that balance. From the Missouri Compromise of 1820 came the Kansas-Nebraska Act. The Kansas-Nebraska Act was passed by the U.S. Congress on May thirtieth, 1854. It allowed people in the territories of Kansas and Nebraska to decide for themselves whether or not to allow slavery within their borders. The Act repealed the Missouri Compromise of 1820. The Kansas-Nebraska Act angered many in the North who considered the Missouri Compromise to be a long-standing binding agreement, however in the South it was strongly supported. Document J shows a map of the United States split into different territories. Nebraska and Kansas territory are opened to slavery on the map which is what caused a division between the North and South, leading to the Civil
In 1819, Missouri desired to be a slave state, however, the Northern Senate overruled and wanted Missouri to be a free state. Since the balance of states would be unequal due to the number of states. In 1820, Maine, which was once part of Massachusetts, became a free state and Missouri became a slave state. Also, the compromise included that north of Missouri would be free states and south of Missouri allowed slavery (36'30). The Missouri Compromise helped push back the conflict of slavery a bit, and kept the balance of the North and South interim. Moreover, economically, the government tries to even out the issues of profit without trying to overwhelm the
The compromise of 1850 was very similar to the Missouri compromise of 1820 in that they both succeeded in bringing together the North and the South. In the early 18th century, there was division in America as result of slavery. At that particular point, the North and South were already in tension due to issue of slavery. Slavery was not widely spread in the North however, businessmen enriched themselves through slave trade in the south. Both Missouri Compromise and Compromise of 1850 both aimed at restoring peace between the North and South slave sated and between the Free and the Slave states.