What was the 1850 Compromise and Why did it Fail? Essay

In an essay that incorporates the textbook, lecture and power-point notes compare and contrast the compromises of 1820 and 1850.

The compromises merely worked, and with the passing of time, tensions rose more between the sections, thus making these compromises less and less effective. The Compromise of 1850 enraged both the North and the South. When California was annexed, it was assigned to become a free state and the South did not appeal to that because the land boundaries that was made by the Missouri Compromise was large. Another part of this compromise that angered Southerners was that slave trade was banned in Washington D.C. The Fugitive Slave Law, which was a part of the Compromise of 1850 angered the North, because it allowed bounty hunters to hunt down slaves and the people who helped them to hide. Also, Northerners rejected this because they rejected Popular Sovereignty, which created possibilities of having slavery in any Northern states.

The Compromise of 1850 brought relative calm to the nation. Though most blacks and abolitionists strongly opposed the Compromise, the majority of Americans embraced it, believing that it offered a final, workable solution to the slavery question. Most importantly, it saved the Union from the terrible split that many had feared. People were all too ready to leave the slavery controversy behind them and move on. But the feeling of relief that spread throughout the country would prove to be the calm before the storm.

The North and South in the nineteenth century were different in lifestyle and morale as well as economy. The north had a booming industrial economy while in the South, cotton was king. Because of this, congress was continuously addressing controversial matters and providing answers that did not satisfy either one side or both. The early 1800s were full of the North and the South making many attempts at reconciliation that just fell short. Among those were the Missouri Compromise of 1820, and the Great Compromise of 1850. Other tempestuous attempts led to the Tariff/Nullification Controversy, anti slavery debates in congress, and the Kansas-Nebraska Act. Whether it was one side or the other, there was always someone to oppose - and in some

The compromise of 1850 was a settlement on a series of issues plaguing the unity of the states. The primary issue to address was the institution of slavery, which was causing much dissension between the north and the south. Additional items to be addressed were territory issues and to prevent secession by the south. Henry Clay stepped forward to present a compromise, which had Congress in an eight-month discussion known as the “Great Debate”. As a result of the proposal, there were strong oppositions. One outspoken person who opposed the proposal was John C Calhoun. Calhoun was an intellectual southern politician, political philosopher and a proponent to the protection of Southern interests. He was an advocate for states’ rights and

The Compromise of 1850 was 5 bills that the U.S. Congress passed in September 1850 to outline a 4-year plan about what to do with the territories aquired during the Mexican-American War. The Compromise addressed whether the territories would become slave states or free states.

At the end of the Mexican War, lands were ceded to the Union in the West. People from the North and the South were debating over whether or not these lands should have slavery. The solution was pushed by Clay, Webster, and Douglas from the North that would give the new lands the choice to be slave or free depending on a vote. During the mid-1800's, the North was industrializing and populating at a much higher rate than the South which was becoming dependent on the cotton industry. The Compromise of 1850 created more problems than it solved in regards to the enforcement of slave laws, lands in the West, and popular sovereignty.

The Compromise of 1850 was a desperate attempt to keep the southern states from seceding from the United States of America. While the goal was to keep the south from seceding, the new laws actually created more tension than it solved. Since the division in America over slave ownership had been holding a delicate balance with the states on both sides, the North and the South. When California petitioned to join the Union in 1849 as a free state, that delicate balance tipped and the conflict once again erupted. The Compromise consisted of 5 laws, admitting California as a free state, creating Utah and New Mexico territories with the question of slavery in each is determined by popular sovereignty, settling a Texas-New Mexico boundary dispute in the former’s favor, ending the slave trade in Washington D.C. and making it easier for southerners to recover fugitive slaves (History).

The measures, a trade off planned by Whig Senator Henry Clay, who neglected to get them through himself, were shepherded to entry by Democratic Senator Stephen Douglas and Whig Senator Daniel Webster. The measures were contradicted by Senator and previous Vice-President John C. Calhoun. The Compromise was conceivable after the demise of President Zachary Taylor, who was in resistance. Succeeding him was an in number supporter of the trade off: Millard Fillmore. It briefly defused sectional strains in the United States, deferring the withdrawal emergency and the American Civil War. The Compromise dropped the Wilmot Proviso, which never got to be law however would have banned subjugation in domain gained from Mexico. Rather the Compromise further embraced the regulation of "Mainstream Sovereignty" for the Territory of New Mexico and the Territory of Utah. The different bargains reduced political controversy for a long time, until the relative respite was broken by the divisive Kansas-Nebraska Act. Basically it was a progression of bills set out to keep the country united. Despite the fact that it postponed progression, it is seen as just a makeshift fix..

In early 1850, the legendary statesman and orator, Daniel Webster, convened with Henry Clay of Kentucky to accumulate approval for Clay’s plan to conserve the Union from itself. This Compromise, appropriately recognized as the Compromise of 1850, guaranteed to address five principal issues at the time. The foremost, was the recognition of California as a free state. At the time, California had not yet amalgamated with the United States, leaving its situation questionable. Next, was the acknowledgement of both New Mexico and Ohio as unresolved states, to refrain from biasing the amount of slave and free states and subsequently, annulling the Wilmot Proviso. As expected, the two Northern politicians wished to expel slave exchange from the prestigious United States capital of the District of Columbia. However, even as Northern men, the Compromise included one last circumstance; a harsher enactment of the Fugitive Slave Law, guaranteeing runaway slaves in the North an unfortunate return to slavery, so as to gain the approval of slave owners and abolitionists

The Compromise of 1850, as it was called, was a bundle of legislation that everyone could agree on. First, congressmen agreed that California would be admitted to the Union as a free state (Utah was not admitted because the Mormons refused to give up the practice of polygamy). The fate of slavery in the other territories, though, would be determined by popular sovereignty. Next, the slave trade (though not slavery itself) was banned in Washington, D.C. Additionally, Texas had to give up some of its land to form the New Mexican territory in exchange for a cancellation of debts owed to the federal government. Finally, Congress agreed to pass a newer and tougher Fugitive Slave Act to enforce the return of escaped slaves to the South.

“I know no South, no North, no East, no West, to which I owe any allegiance, The Union, sir, is my country” - Henry Clay (United States History). The Compromise of 1850 was once considered despising, loathing, and abhorring. This would become altered, as it would turn out to be one of the greatest compromises in the United States and would make its mark in history. The Compromise of 1850 adopted the Fugitive Slave Act and the reason for California statehood. The compromise attempted to avoid a crisis between the North and the South, with the assistance of Henry Clay and his colleagues. The document came to be with three main ideas: significance, conflict, and compromise. The Compromise of 1850, proposed by Henry Clay, dealt with disputes

As time passed the rapidly changing society in the nineteenth century, in 1820 the north and south began to have serious conflicting problems that were proved unfixable by compromise. During this time, the north underwent major social, economic, and industrial changes known as the Antebellum Period. While the south generally clung to king cotton and slavery and thus remained essentially the same. This arose a manifold of controversies with how issues such as tariffs, slavery, and land should be handled. Both the Union and the Confederacy tried to create compromises to resolve these problems, yet both sides were never completely satisfied no matter how hard they tried. This made it very close to impossible for them to completely put their

African-Americans may sometimes wonder at the contradictory facts about their history presented in many standard history texts. These texts state that blacks were given the right to vote in 1870, yet the same texts will acknowledge that this right did not really exist for African-Americans until the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s.

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.