The Compromise Of The Civil War

Throughout the 1800’s many compromises were created with the intent of pulling two nations together to from a more perfect government. The North and the South have different views that created many conflicts between the two parties. Congress continued to address controversial matters with compromises that only benefitted one side or the other and not both. These compromises affected the North and the South; however they started to drastically worsen because both sides had economic, social, and political differences.

As tensions between the North and the South rose on the issues of slavery and states’ rights, numerous compromises were proposed to ease the conflict. Such compromises included the Missouri Compromise, the Compromise of 1850, and the Crittenden Compromise. These compromises had intentions of defining where slavery was permitted and clarifying states’ rights. They were only temporary fixes to a more pressing issue. Between the Missouri Compromise and the Crittenden Compromise, a series of events changed the political atmosphere of the United States and prevented any more compromises on the institution of slavery from being passed.

At the time, the United States contained twenty-two states, evenly divided between slave and free. In the years leading up to the Missouri Compromise of 1820, tensions began to rise between proslavery and antislavery factions within the U.S. Congress and across the country. They reached a boiling point after Missouri’s 1819 request for admission to the Union as a slave state, which threatened to upset the delicate balance between slave states and free states. To keep the peace, Congress came up with a two-part compromise, granting Missouri’s request but also admitting Maine as a free state. It also passed an amendment that drew an imaginary line across the former Louisiana Territory, establishing a boundary between free and slave regions that remained the law of the land until it was repealed by the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854.

There has been much debate as to whether the Civil War could have been avoided or not. The Evansville Daily Journal argues that the Civil War was inevitable, but Alexander Stephens disagrees and proposes that the war could have been avoided. Stephen’s argument is superior to the Evansville Daily Journal one because it objectively talks about the recent changes in the United States, explains the different views between the North and South, and tries to convince people that a war is not necessary.

The Civil War that occurred was one of the darkest times in our history as a country. It was a time where there was a complete breakdown of social and political systems. Hundreds of thousands were killed and hundreds of thousands more were aversely affected. However, it was also a time of remembrance and significant moral progress. It is remembered as the turning point in American History and would be the foundation for the Civil Rights movement many years later.

Ever since declaring its independence from Britain, America has developed on the foundation of compromise. Upon the drafting of the Constitution, the Founding Fathers were succumbed to compromise in order to incorporate the needs of the different parts of the nation. During the early eighteenth century, Americans achieved reconciliation of political disputes, predominately between the North and the South, through compromise. By 1860 this was no longer feasible and the nation was faced with disheartening threats to its unity. Sectionalism in the Union was further increased. Tariffs were commonly accepted by one part of the nation and debated by the other. The economy of the North and South was becoming increasingly divergent- the North

The free states were equal in political power to the slave states, this made it hard to come to decisive decisions when each state wanted their own way.. If more slave states were added, pro-slavery states would have more power in Congress. The Southern states had more representatives due to the three-fifths of slave law. The issue of slavery continues to build and the Federal government couldn’t make a decision on the matter, fearing that states would secede the Union. No laws on ending or promoting slavery were created, the only laws created were short term fixes for pleasing both views. Compromises were made in the hopes of solving the slavery issue like a Union. The Missouri Compromise of 1820 would have upset the balance of Congress because Missouri wants to enter the Union as a slave state. It is decided that Missouri will enter a slave state, but the rest of the land gained through Manifest Destiny will be divided at the 36’30’ attitude. All the land North will be free while all the area South will be slave states. The Compromise of 1850 was for states applying for statehood, such as California, Utah, and New

The compromises from 1846 to 1861 were, by their intentions, to postpone the struggle between the north and the south temporarily but not to solve it. The foundational problems, like the the slavery itself, the differences in social structure and economic system and the expansion of slavery, were left. The increasing struggle between the abolitionists and slave owners and between the newly formed Republican Party and the Democratic Party kept putting those questions in front of the US people. The compromises themselves failed to satisfy the wants of both sides, enraged the north and frightened the south, so up to the election of Lincoln, the tension built up to a climax and finally broke out to become a civil war.

The Civil War is known as a turning point in America, the road to ending slavery, while first turning a nation against each other.

At first, the Compromise seemed to settle the issue; however, the alarming issue arose again when Mexico ceded new territory to the Union. Differences between the views of the North and South led to a deeper divide that eventually led to the Civil War. The Missouri controversy, an extremely heated crisis between the North and South over slavery in the Louisiana territory, reached to new heights almost as great as the time of secession in 1860. This huge debate showed just how slavery divided the nation (Forbes). Many people knew the consequences of banning slavery, so they kept the Missouri Compromise in place.

Slavery was a major reason why compromise failed. The Compromise of 1850 and the Missouri Compromise of 1820 were established in order to unite the nation. During this time, the South was unable to resolve their political conflicts, dealing with slavery. Henry Clay once said, “it is impossible that South Carolina ever desired for a moment to become a separate and independent state.” (Doc A). Although the Anti- Slavery convention of 1835 went against slavery, the people who attended did not believe congress had the “right to interfere with any of the slave states.” (Doc B). This evidence proves the fact that compromise was not significantly affected by political opinions. However, the North was not in favor of the Compromise of 1850, which included the fugitive slave law and the establishment of the Wilmot Proviso, due to the fact that slavery threatened political stances. In the election of 1860, tensions surfaced as no southern state voted for Lincoln. However he won the majority of the popular and electoral vote. (Doc H). Slavery caused many political issues, which ultimately resulted in southern withdrawal and breakdown in

In the years leading up to the Civil War, the compromise of 1850 helped to delay the fight between brothers by having both sides concede important ideals. The compromise of 1850 is logical, because it gave each state a vote in whether or not they could once again get along. This concession allowed for both sides to air out their grievances, and allow for improvement. Both sides were primarily focused on regionalism and cared only for their area and beliefs. One such example is slavery.

In 1854, the argument over slavery appeared in Congress again when Stephen A. Douglas introduced the Compromise of 1850. Kansas and Nebraska would become free states because of where they are located, north of 36’30’N latitude. If they both became free states, the balance would be broken. Douglas knew southerners would object to this so he let the people in each territory vote on it to be a free or slave state so he introduced the Kansas-Nebraska Act. This is called popular sovereignty when the people get to decide on an issue.

Although one should compromise when they can, that option should not always be entertained. In various cases, the immediate inclination to settle with the opposition has led to cataclysmic consequences. Furthermore, that scenario has played out in numerous occasions in history, one notable instance being the compromises on the subject of slavery from the United States which resulted in the outbreak of the American Civil War. While numerous individuals at this time, especially politicians, accepted the compromises as a solution to war, some men such as William Lloyd Garrison, refused to believe in any reasonable compromise in the subject matter. In addition, the controversy of compromise occurs in the 21st century, although it has proven

As America began to expand, first with the lands gained from the Louisiana Purchase and later with the Mexican War, the question of whether new states admitted to the union would be slave or free. The Missouri Compromise passed in 1820 made a rule that prohibited slavery in states from the former Louisiana Purchase the latitude 36 degrees 30 minutes north except in Missouri. During the Mexican War, conflict started about what would happen with the new territories that the US expected to gain upon victory. David Wilmot proposed the Wilmot Proviso in 1846 which would ban slavery in the new lands. However, this was shot down to much debate. The Compromise of 1850 was created by Henry Clay and others to deal with the balance between slave and free states, northern and southern interests. One of the provisions was the fugitive slave act that was discussed in number one above. Another issue that further increased tensions was the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854. It created two new territories that would allow the states to use popular sovereignty to determine whether they would be free or slave. The real issue occurred in Kansas where proslavery Missourians