Preview

Break down of compromise between 1820 and 1860 leading to the civil war

Powerful Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1482 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Break down of compromise between 1820 and 1860 leading to the civil war
AP U.S. History
December 3, 2013
Analysis of the Compromise Breakdown from 1820 to 1860 Time periods of American history are analyzed closely to the extent that it is essential to understand the motives and basis for future events and to recognize social patterns. Among events that have affected the United States, immigrations, wars and political dispute are three of the chief categories that most directly affect the state of the nation as well as each other. The war class has been easily liked to both political and social changes in the domestic atmosphere and is therefore subject to analysis of the varying origins and causes. And no other war has affected the United States like the Civil War due to the sheer number of deaths and the complete reconstruction of the nation during the aftermath. Just as important as the war itself would be the transformations that took place among the people was a newfound lack of compromise concerning the admission of new territories and whether or not they would be free or slave. This failure to agree was chiefly the fear of public and congressional imbalance. This and dispute over the legitimacy and abuse of popular sovereignty would cause quarrels and accusations attributed to the constitutionality of documents passed and the course certain events took, mainly, the Missouri Compromise, the South Carolina Nullification Crisis, the Kansas-Nebraska Act, and the Presidential election of 1860, the main contributors to the breakdown of compromise seen in this era.

In the years leading up to the Missouri Compromise of 1820, tensions began to rise between pro-slavery and anti-slavery 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. In order to maintain peace, Congress created a two-part compromise, which granted Missouri’s request

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    The Missouri Compromise was created in 1820 to put an end to the conflict between the slave and non-slave states, however, it only caused the conflict to worsen. The dispute began to get worse and worse, eventually making the sectionalism between the North and South increase. The Missouri Compromise ignited sectionalism within the United States, which further contributed to a terrible War.…

    • 398 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Missouri Compromise Dbq

    • 413 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The Missouri Compromise is commonly thought of as the beginning of American sectionalism, although the signs were visible long before 1819. The crisis solved by the compromise certainly alerted the South for the need for political unity in order to maintain its way of life in the face of a more populous North. Likewise, it alerted both regions to the political problems inherent in westward expansion. The Missouri Compromise did not create sectionalism, but it is important as the first possible signs of sectionalist differences in the US.…

    • 413 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Missouri Compromise was written in the year of 1820 on March 3rd and was also passed on the same day. This compromise approved Missouri to come to America as a slave state, but conserved the correspondence between the North and the South by modeling the land of Maine out of Massachusetts and stopping slavery from territories accomplished in the Louisiana Purchase which is the north of the line of 36 30’ and this is the southern boundary of Missouri. The South and the North was not satisfied with the Missouri Compromise because many southern congressmen balloted to oppose the compromise. They opposed it because the limit on future slavery in the territories was not excessively abusive to the slave owners. It was abusive to them because the…

    • 459 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The political compromise during the period of 1820 to 1860 was unable to reduce sectional tension during this time period. According to Tom Meltzer and Jean H. Bennett, in their book CRACKING THE AP U.S. HISTORY EXAM, “The new period of expansion resulted in a national debate over slavery, as would every period of expansion to follow until the Civil War resolved the slavery question.” The Missouri Compromise, the Compromise of 1850, and… were just a quick fix for the inevitable to come, the civil war. The political compromises of this time period were not able to meet their final goal, primarily because of misunderstandings…

    • 262 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Most of the time, compromise helps stop a fight from starting and is generally a way to end a fight. However, the Civil War was only delayed by compromise because both sides didn’t want to give anything up. Compromise’s role in delaying the Civil War was keeping both the North and South happy, but it didn’t help.…

    • 469 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Apush 1800's Frq

    • 557 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Preceding the Missouri Compromise was the Tallmadge amendment. When the Tallmadge amendment was passed, the South was infuriated. The amendment decreed that the slave state of Missouri had to gradually free all of their slaves and prohibited any more slaves to be brought into Missouri before they could be admitted into the Union. This made slave-owning Southerners upset because they viewed the amendment as a threat to sectional equality and balance. With the South suspicious of the North trying to ban slavery and the North suspicious of the South trying to expand slavery, both sides naturally flocked to the West in order to gain another slave or free state to tip the balance of power in their direction. Even in the Florida Purchase Treaty of 1819, after war hero Andrew Jackson exceeded his orders from the White House and tore through Florida, motives for acquiring new land seemed to continually hint towards the growing sectionalism and concern about the issue of slavery. Also, the uneasy Missouri Compromise gave both North and South even more reason to expand westward. The Missouri Compromise established Missouri as a unrestricted slave state which gave abolitionists and Northerners great concern about the spread of slavery while the establishment of the Missouri Compromise line that prohibited slavery above it caused Southerners to worry about slavery too. All the suspicions and fears of the two sections resulted in a fast and furious expansionism in the west. Then, during the…

    • 557 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The Missouri Compromise, in many ways made political conditions worse between the North and South. For a long time the North and South had been fighting about political issues such as slavery. The North believed that it was wrong to capture, enslave and ship Africans to America to work in harsh conditions for free for White owners. The South, on the other hand believed slavery was right and should be used for helping the economy and producing cash crops so the North could use the supplies to make products. But the addition of new states, especially an uneven number made the tension grow between the two sides on the decision of slavery.…

    • 299 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    Missouri Compromise

    • 1338 Words
    • 6 Pages

    These failed compromises served purposes other than their intended ones. They served to “feed the extremist factions” in each of the divided sections of America. The deterioration of these compromises aided the progression of groups like the Radical Republicans, Know- Nothings, Free-Soil Party, and Abolitionists. One of the compromises that served to feed these factions was the Missouri Compromise. As stated before, this compromise debated on the admission Maine and Missouri as slave or free states. It resulted in the 36°30’ line being set and is an example of an almost direct conflict between the North and the South on the institution. The North was against the spread of slavery so even though they conceded Missouri they were able to contain…

    • 1338 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Dred Scott Decision

    • 326 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The Missouri Compromise was one reason for the beginning of the Civil War.In 1820, Missouri wanted to join as a slave state but if the state was accepted then there would be more slave states then free states.The Missouri compromise was worked out between Senator Henry Clay and Congress that whenever a slave state was accepted a free state also had to be accepted. Missouri was accepted with the exception of Maine also being accepted as a free state.The south wanted more slaves because they depended on them for all the farming and manufacturing.…

    • 326 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    Removal of the Missouri Compromise upset a decision that took place years before the case even appeared before the Supreme Court, when the United States acquired a mass of land west of the Mississippi River from France in 1803 during the Jeffersonian administration. Even though the majority of Americans believed that acquiring land was crucial to securing America’s position on the world stage, the topic of slavery in these states was still a heavily debated subject. During this time the United States had 22 states, 11 of which were free and 11 of which were slave. These states preserved a delicate balance of power in the Senate. In 1817, when Missouri requested admission into the union, this balance was threatened. Congress, in 1819, contemplated legislation that would allow Missouri to construct its own state constitution, which led James Tallmadge, a representative of New York, to add a stipulation that would ban slavery in the new state to the legislation. The amendment passed in the house, which was controlled by northern representatives, but failed to pass in the senate which was equally divided between northern and southern states. The senate adjourned without having resolved the issue. The issue of slavery in the newly acquire land led to heated debates…

    • 1714 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Alvin York

    • 910 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Alvin York started off as an average man who loved to hunt and use guns and ended up using those skills for something else. Alvin York ended up with a Congressional Medal of Honor because of his skills with weapons. Alvin York was a kind and decent man who never planned to serve in World War I, but his life changed when he was drafted.…

    • 910 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The compromise granted disproportionate political power to Southern slave states. The Missouri Compromise in 1820 allowed Missouri to enter as a slave state but preserved the balance between North and South by carving free- soil Maine out of Massachusetts and prohibiting slavery from territories acquired in the Louisiana Purchase, north of the line of 36° 30’. This compromise also preserved the shaky compact of the states. Later in 1865, the thirteenth amendment was added to the constitution eight months after the Civil War ended.…

    • 638 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    SECTION II Part A (Suggested writing time—45 minutes) Percent of Section II score—45 Directions: The following question requires you to construct a coherent essay that integrates your interpretation of Documents A-J and your knowledge of the period referred to in the question. High scores will be earned only…

    • 1873 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    causes of civil war

    • 820 Words
    • 4 Pages

    New experimentations in government around the beginning period of the Civil War were being used. The Great Compromise of 1787 or Sherman's Compromise was an agreement that large and small states reached during the Constitutional Convention of 1787 that in part defined the legislative structure and representation that each state would have under the United States Constitution. It retained the bicameral legislature as proposed by Roger Sherman, along with proportional representation in the lower house, but required the upper house to be weighted equally between the states. Each state would have two representatives in the upper house. Another compromise was the Missouri compromise. The Missouri Compromise was passed in 1820 between the pro-slavery and anti-slavery factions in the United States Congress, involving primarily the regulation of slavery in the western territories. It prohibited slavery in the former Louisiana Territory north of the parallel 36°30′ north except within the boundaries of the proposed state of Missouri. The Missouri Compromise settled the question of slavery in the United States for many years. Its repeal would bring about conflict that would lead to the Civil War. In 1854 the Missouri Compromise was repealed as part of the Kansas-Nebraska Act. The Kansas-Nebraska Act allowed white male settlers in those territories to determine through popular sovereignty whether they would allow slavery within each territory. It became problematic when popular sovereignty was written into the proposal so that the voters of the moment would decide…

    • 820 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Fate of Their Country

    • 1065 Words
    • 5 Pages

    "To locate the most direct causes of the American Civil War," he contends in the preface, "one must look at the actions of governmental officeholders in the decades before that horrific conflict." Professor Michael F Holt needs no introduction among historians. He is single handedly regarded as one of the scholars who is most responsible for the emergence of what some call a neo-revisionist interpretation and outlook about the origins and circumstances that resulted in the Civil War. His ideas which are reflected throughout his books especially “The Fate of their country” emphasize that the reasons which caused The Civil War could have been and should have been averted. Defending this ideology Holt criticizes historians who stand by their argument of “Sectional conflict over slavery and slavery extension caused the Civil War”. Instead he preaches throughout his works that include many influential books including “The Fate of their Country” that, contingent political factors played a very huge and predominant role is stimulations factors causing disunion among the states.…

    • 1065 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays