A Brief History of the Great Compromise

Hi! I’m an inhabitant of Connecticut, which you probably already know, is a small state. There have been many arguments between the large and small states about representation. That’s why the states are currently going through a compromise, or an agreement between two or more sides in which each side gives up some of what it wants. States with large populations, such as Virginia, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania, favor the Virginia Plan. In the Virginia Plan, the number of representatives is proportional, or corresponding, to the amount of people in the population. On the other hand, states with smaller populations, such as New Jersey and Connecticut, rather have equal representation within all the states, which is why they prefer the New Jersey Plan. Anyways, enough with the facts. It’s time for me to share my

However, this plan favors the larger states such as Virginia when it comes to voting. Article two of the Virginia Plan clearly states that the “rights of suffrage in the National Legislature ought to be proportioned to the Quotas of contribution, or to the number of free inhabitants…” If the Virginia Plan were to fully be put in effect, this would mean that smaller states would get little or no say while larger states would dominate.

Both the Virginia and New Jersey Plans dealt with how the states should be represented in Congress during the Constitutional Convention. The Virginia Plan wanted a strong national government with a bicameral legislature, while the New Jersey Plan wanted a weak national government with a unicameral legislature. The Virginia Plan favored big states such as Virginia, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania while New Jersey Plan favored small states such as New Jersey and Rhode Island. The Virginia Plan believed that states should be represented according to their population and the greater the population of a state, the more representatives they would have. While The New Jersey Plan called for every state to receive the same number of representatives,

The Virginia Plan was favored by the big states. It envisioned a bicameral legislature with both houses having membership proportional to population. The New Jersey plan was favored by the small states. It called for each state's representation in each house to be equal to every other states. The delegates considered whether the legislature should be elected directly by the people or by the state legislatures. The usual arguments against allowing

On the other hand, delegates from less populous states favored the New Jersey Plan which declared that all states would have an equal amount of votes. This idea goes back to the Articles of Confederation giving each state one vote. Both ideas were strongly reinforced by their respective sides, but they needed to be combined together in a way that would satisfy both large and small states.

The nation was torn apart from the very thing that had been its basic building blocks, which was the right for the states to have their own power. With bigger and more industrial states wanting representation based on population and smaller and more rural states, also known as the Confederates, wanting an equal vote no matter the size of the population within the state. Through much debate and argument, the men were not able to agree on a plan, the states were in a predicament. The bigger states like, New York, Pennsylvania, and Virginia, also known as the Union, supported the Virginia plan. This plan states that the house should be divided into two chambers. Each state would be represented by a proportion of their population, thus states with larger populations like, New York, Pennsylvania, and Virginia, would have more representatives than those of a smaller states. With

Citizens were also fearful that any person they put into power, could possibly abuse the jurisdiction in which they were given. “They uniformly exercise all the powers granted to them, and ninety-nine in a hundred are for grasping at more”(Document G). This proposes that all those given power, always wanted more power. The high figures seemed to never be satisfied and this concerned Americans on the leadership of the country. “...It is of high importance that powerful checks should be formed to prevent the abuse of it” (Document G). To ensure that no leader could take advantage of the power one was given, checks and balances were created. This made each branch of government keep each other balanced and not over powerful on making decisions. The Executive, Legislative, and Judicial Branch all possess certain jurisdictions that only allow them so much power. This checks and balances system creates an equal government in the United States in each branch of

Compromise—that means to come to an agreement, a settlement that brings peace, but not without some discomfort for both sides. This compromise is hopefully long-lasting and satisfying to both sides and brings with it a rest. The Compromise of 1850 sounds like exactly that, but there is more to this compromise. This “compromise” came when there was much dispute about the future of the western lands recently acquired from the Mexican government—California, Utah, and New Mexico. The Southerners of America wanted the states entered into the union as slave states, while the Northerners wanted them entered as free states. When this issue became more heated and continued to escalate, "The Great Compromiser,” Mr. Henry Clay himself, came out of retirement to do “his thing” and create a compromise. He proposed that California would enter the union as a Slave State and Utah and New Mexico would enter as neutral, being neither a slave nor free state. Parts of both the North and the South hated and liked this plan. Some misanthropists in the South threatened to secede from the union and while the majority knew that to be rubbish at the time, it did eventually come true with the start of the Civil War. The North wanted to see slavery come to an end and were fighting tooth and nail to see that through. After months of debating and changes made to Clay’s compromise it was eventually put into action. There was still unrest in both the North and South, and the compromise only

This worked out to satisfaction of the smaller states and for the larger states they were given a House of Representatives that would consist of a larger body of representatives for each state in proportion to the amount of the people in that state.

A widely controversial issue while creating the Constitution was the number of representatives each state would receive. Larger states advocated for the Virginia plan where there would be a two-house legislature, one of which would comprise representatives directly elected by the population while the other was composed of those nominated by the legislators. This legislature would then be responsible for deciding the executive and judicial branches of the government. Smaller states backed the New Jersey Plan where a one-house legislature was supported, with each state receiving one vote. The representatives would be selected by the legislators and this new Congress would now have the power to collect fees and appoint Supreme Court members. The Virginia Plan would allow for larger states to have more power because representation was proportional to the population while the New Jersey Plan would allow smaller states to havae more power because they had the same amount of representation for a smaller population.

The Compromise of 1850 was the result of many years of tension regarding the issue of slavery, and the plethora of problems that came with it, such as the admission of slave and free states into the Union, and fugitive slave laws. The Compromise was a package of 5 separate bills passed in the United States in September of 1850, which helped to diffuse a massive conflict that had been brewing for four-years between the pro-slave Southern states and anti-slave Northern states. The Compromise was drafted by Whig Senator Henry Clay of Kentucky and brokered by Clay and Democratic Senator Stephen Douglas and helped to reduce sectional conflict for a short time. Naturally, controversy arose over the Fugitive Slave provision of the Compromise. At the time, the compromise was greeted with certain degree of relief from both sides, although the North and the South were both able to see that this draft was only a temporary solution to an ever-growing national problem.

Although Northerns opposed the concept of slavery, they viewed blacks as inferior to whites. One main concern of the North was that freed or escaped slaves would overrun the North. This would lead to fewer jobs for whites as they competed against the freed slaves for the limited number of jobs. The Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 (Avalon Project) was passed through Congress as a result of a compromise that allowed southern slaveholders to recapture their escaped slaves that fled across the Mason Dixon to Northern states.

On the question of state representation, the delegates were not able to come to a decision on which plan to use (the Virginia or the New Jersey plan). The Virginia plan had three branches of government and two houses in the legislature, representing the states in Congress. The number of representatives for each state were based on population. Bigger states would have a larger say in the federal government. The New Jersey plan also had three branches of government, but only one house in Congress and each state would have equal representation, independent of population.

Big states vs small states came to an agreement that each state shall be given the number of representatives depending on the population of the state as said in document C “Representatives … shall be apportioned ... according to [population]...” Small states like Rhode Island and Delaware were given one representative due to their small population. Other bigger states like Virginia with its vast population has ten representatives. This dissection befitted the bigger states more than the smaller states since they would have more of a say during meetings. Although they may have had more power in the house in the senate all

Because we frequently work in large, diverse groups, it often difficult to gauge on everyone's demands and deliver satisfying results to each member. Therefore, we often find ourselves in need of making decisions collectively, often at some group members' disdain. To reduce this occurrence, we need to make compromises. Human history is a history of compromises. Connecticut Compromise, Missouri Compromise, and the Compromise of 1850 are all compromises that delivered historically significant results. In our daily lives, although the compromises we make do not carry historically significant results like the three did, they carry the transformative power to alleviate our differences. For example, as a Wikipedia patroller, I often nominate substandard