The Missouri Compromise Essay

Research Task- Describe the role of the 1820 Missouri Compromise in the campaign against slavery!

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.

Through out the history of America, there were many compromises made as a desperate attempt to make both groups of people of either side happy as much as they could. In this case, the United States tried to avoid war with a series of political compromises in an attempt to reduce sectional tensions between the North and South, which proved to be ineffective.

Sectional differences between the North and the South have caused the two regions to disagree on multiple issues since the establishment of the United States. The North’s economy was primarily based on industry, while the South’s economy was primarily based on agriculture, which greatly changed the two section’s desire and need for slaves. When the United States began annexing new territory, disputes over the expansion of slavery became prominent. In the Missouri Compromise of 1820, Missouri was added to the Union as a slave state while Maine was added as a free state in order to maintain the balance between slave and free states, and slavery was prevented from extending above the 36th parallel line. In order to follow the guidelines of the Missouri Compromise, Southerners looked westward in order to expand slavery. Southerners supported the extension of slavery into western territories because it allowed them to use free labor to harvest cotton and other crops, and the addition of new slave states would strengthen the South in the House of Representatives, because more states would vote for policies that favored slaveholders. Northerners were against the expansion of slavery into Western territories because they believed slave labor undermined free white labor and took away job opportunities, and would disrupt the balance between free and slave states. Controversy over the expansion of slavery into western territories between the years of 1845-1861 contributed to the

Though members of the house tried to pass the Wilmot proviso, which would ban slavery in newly acquired Mexican territories, Southerners naturally opposed this. Disagreements over how to decide the newly acquired land’s position on slavery, further intensified sectionalism between the North and South. At one point the South even tried to pass the Ostend Manifesto in an attempt to purchase Cuba from Spain, and admit it into the Union as a slave state. Although this effort failed, it strongly represents the intense sectionalism during the time: As an entire portion of the country acted autonomously to secure an additional state to gain power over their Northern neighbors. Finally, the compromise of 1850 was passed, declaring popular sovereignty as the determining factor of the position of slavery among the land

This amendment is known as the Tallmadge Amendment. This bill stated that no slaves could be brought into the state of Missouri and slaves born there would be freed at the age of 25. Southerners were bothered by this suggested law because they felt that it would threaten the sectional balance we had in our country and that Congress would attempt to abolish slavery in southern states. As a solution to this growing dilemma, Henry Clay proposed the Missouri compromise in 1820. This compromise, commonly known as “The Great Compromise”, stated three important things. One being that Missouri was to be admitted as a slaveholding state. Second, Maine was to be admitted as a free state, in order to keep the balance. Third, in the rest of the Louisiana territory north of latitude 36º 30' , slavery was prohibited. Although this compromise was accepted by both sides of the country, it upset many Northerners, thus increasing growing sectionalism in our nation. Nevertheless, the “Era of Good feelings” was badly damaged by Americans’ torn feelings of sectional controversy over Missouri (North vs. South).

Later, many questions arose regarding if the newly acquired territory should allow slavery. In the attempt to solve this, Henry Clay led the Missouri Compromise which admitted Missouri as a slave state, and Maine as a free state creating a balance in Congress. This led to the belief that later in the future slavery be prohibited north of the southern border of Missouri in the remaining of the Louisiana Purchase. The issue of slavery continued to be an issue as the nation expanded because the Missouri Compromise didn’t apply to new territories that were not part of the Louisiana Purchase. By the new land acquired, the Southern economy increased because of the “Cotton King”, which also increased the labor in order to maintain the newly achieved economy. One the other hand, the North believed that the expansion of slavery was very small because they didn’t depend on slavery for their economic survival. The North relied on on textile industry on southern crops was increased by the creation of the cotton gin. Many Americans kept migrating to the west despite after the Missouri Compromise was adopted. Many would cross to the Oregon Territory, which belonged to the British and many more settled in Mexican territory

The south began to rely on agriculture as their basis of economic growth. For this to be success, slavery was an almost a natural need for the people of the south. Cotton began to grow as a cash crop for the South. Cotton was dependent on many workers needed for it to exist, thus the need for such a large amount of work force. Slavery in the late 1700’s was beginning to die down and cotton was paying the biggest price for it. Not until Eli Whitney’s invention of the cotton gin did the issue of slavery spark up again and cotton begins to thrive. In 1820 Missouri wished to be part of the Union as a slave state. With there already being an equality of Slave states and Free states it caused tension and sectionalism within the country; because of the edition of Missouri would cause an unbalance of free and slave states. In hopes to resolve this conflict a compromise was reached known as the Missouri Compromise. Through the Missouri Compromise Missouri was able to enter as a slave state, while Maine was able to enter as a free state. However, as pointed out, it created a line between slave states and Free states. Any state below Missouri was able to practice slavery, and any state above was to be a Free State. Even John Quincy Adams led to the sectionalism, with his supportive views of the Compromise. (Document F) He expressed views in the emancipation of slavery as a

During the period of 1820-1861 the north and south debated on issues that dealt with slavery and unbalance power, in order to reduce sectional tension between these two states, the Missouri Compromise, Compromise of 1850, and the Kansas-Nebraska Act were proposed.

One of the main topics of concern for many decades was when new territories want to enter the union, will they be free or slave states? Henry Clay, one of the great compromisers, was able to work all sorts of different compromises on several issues throughout the years. One of his most famous compromises was the Missouri compromise. This allowed Missouri to enter the Union as a slave state, and every new state following would be free North of the Mason-Dixon line. This would try to stop the expansion of slavery, and for a short while, it did. During this time period, most Americans believed in manifest destiny, so they expanded westward. As many Southern’s moved west, they brought with them their slaves. Furthermore, they moved to places where slavery made economic sense, for example

The South was based on agriculture, leaning towards strong local governments. The North was heavily influenced by Henry Clay’s American System, accompanied with large scale industrialization and cities. The most distinctive political difference between the northern and southern states was their view on slavery. The southern states found slaves a necessity in order to have a labour force to operated the cotton gins in the plantations; however, the northern states opposed the use of slaves due to their morales. This sectionalism caused a division among American citizens, affecting the government’s ability to unite the two political ideologies. To attempt to satisfy the demands of both the North and South, the Missouri Compromise of 1820 was created to resolve issues of slavery in newer western states. This compromise brought upon the 36-30 Parallel Line, a geographical line that split the North and South, depicting the contrasting political and societal views and increasing sectionalism (F). This power struggle between states and the federal government only caused unrest, resulting in no further beneficial reforms or rulings, causing the Era of Good Feelings to not hold true to its name.

The Civil War, which lasted from 1861 to 1877, was mainly caused by the diverging society between the North and the South. The North and the South had different goals. There were many factors that led to the war and the chief ones were political and economic differences between the North and the South. The North’s aggression to control the South had led to the point where it was intolerable. The issue on slavery was one of the causes of the Civil War. Slavery and slave trades had become a big part of the South’s economy. The slaves were needed to work on plantations which helped the South prospered. During the 19th Century, the North worked hard on abolishing slavery, which they thought was a disgrace to the Union.

In efforts to better understand the Civil War most historians examine the Sectional Crisis and the Compromise of 1850 in the decades leading up to the worst years in American History. Some historians prefer to focus on the underlying theme of the war, others tightly examine individual leaders, events, and political parties, connecting them all together like puzzle pieces to define the years prior to the war. Despite the contrasting views, it is clear to realize the constant prevailing issues of the Antebellum Period, the Sectional Crisis and the Compromise of 1850. In particular, the Compromise of 1850 is deceivingly taught as only establishing 3 pivotal elements: the status of slavery in future territories (popular sovereignty), California statehood, and the fugitive slave law. Granted these elements of the compromise provide a great amount of controversy long after their birth, but one element of the compromise perceives to fail in obtaining recognition. The Texas-New Mexico boundary resolution seems to find itself fading away from its relevancy to the civil war, shadowed by more prominent issues regarding the stability of the Union. Abandoning the traditional teaching of the compromise, the Texas-New Mexico border decision figuratively and literally changed the identity of Texas. This was the long awaited result caused by deep rooted social and political issues dating back to the Texas Revolution.

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

Southerners believes that if the United States could forbid slavery in Missouri, they could do so elsewhere. It 1820 congress finally agreed that slavery would be allowed in Missouri, but at the same time Maine would be carved out and admitted to the union as a free state. They also agreed that as the United States Expanded westward, states north of the 36 and a half degrees North would be free states, while states south of that would be slave states. This angered the north because under the compromise the new slave states covered more land than that of the new free states. Northerners worried that another slave state might increase the power of the southern states in the government.