During the elections of 1860, the United States was divided by decisions concerning slavery. The Missouri territory came to the United States as part of the 1803 Louisiana Purchase. The House of Representatives put forward an amendment to the admission of Missouri that would prohibit the introduction of slaves into Missouri and freeing the children of slaves at the age of 25. The Senate passed the bill admitting Missouri without the amendment, but it was rejected by the House, pushing the controversy into 1820. The Great Compromiser, Henry Clay, proposed the following elements of a sectional compromise: That Missouri be admitted to the Union as a slave state (as the population of the territory apparently desired).That slavery was to be prohibited from the new American territories in the Louisiana Purchase north of 36/30’ north latitude (the southern boundary of Missouri). States to the south of the line (the new Arkansas Territory) would decide the slavery issue for themselves. Missouri became the 24th state on August 10, 1821. The Missouri Compromise was canceled in 1854 with the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Act.…
First, the Missouri Compromise of 1820 established the slavery line that allowed slavery below it and forbid slavery above it. It also gave the South another slave state in Missouri and the north a free state in Maine. Although each region gained a state in the Senate, the south benefited most from the acquisition because Missouri was in such a pivotal position in the country, right on the border. Later on with the Kansas-Nebraska Act in 1854, Missouri had a big role in getting Kansas to vote south because many proslavery Missourians crossed the border into Kansas to vote slavery. The Missouri Compromise also helped slavery because the line that was formed to limit slavery had more land below the line than above it. Therefore, slavery was given more land to be slave and therefore more power in the Senate, when the territories became state. In effect, the north got the short end of the stick and the south was given the first hint of being able to push around the north. The interesting thing is, the north agreed to all these provisions that would clearly benefit the south.…
The first debate over the issue of territorial expansion began when Missouri wanted to join the union as a slave state. Missouri, which was part of the Louisiana Purchase, which was part of the Northwest Ordinance. The Northwest Ordinance stopped slavery in the Northwest Territories. In 1817, when Missouri applied to the Union as a slave state, the issue of anti-slavery vs. pro slavery came up. In 1819, Maine applied to become a free state. A compromise was then reached, so that Maine would enter as a free state, while Missouri would enter as a slave state, balancing free and slave states. New territories that would enter above the 36’30’ line had to be free…
The Constitution can be interpreted in many different ways, which leads to sectional discord and tension. For many reasons, the South evidently did not like what the constitution said. There were many conflictions with the compromise of 1850, map shown in (Document A) and the fugitive slave act. Certain northerners were so against slavery and the fugitive slave act that they even posted warnings for the slaves. (Document C), [shows how kidnappers were being sent after the slaves, and how Northern abolitionists were revolting against the South's rules and regulations.] This fugitive slave act also helped drive the tension deeper into the Un-United States.…
Although the Constitution was not the only factor leading to sectional tension in America, there are many strong points in the North and South favoring the statement, "By the 1850's the Constitution, originally framed as an instrument of national unity, had become a source of sectional discord and tension and ultimately contributed to the failure of the union it had created."It is known that the union did not last, for there was the Civil War. If the majority of congressional leaders could agree on what the constitution implied, then there probably would not have been a civil war. From several of the documents, there are arguments about what the constitution states. “To the Argument, that the word ‘slaves’ and ‘slavery’ are not to be found in The Constitution, and therefore it was never intended to give any protection or countenance to the slave system, it is sufficient to reply, that no such words are continued in the instrument, other words were used, intelligently and specifically, to meet the necessities of slavery.” Ralph Waldo Emerson, address on the fugitive slave law. This indicated the constitution can be interpreted differently, and when used with other pertinent documents, can be incongruous. Those views that differentiated were of those in the North and South.…
One of the biggest issues contested during the Constitutional Convention was the fate of the slave trade. Northern states wanted it abolished largely because of the negotiated three-fifths rule which allowed slaves to be counted toward the number of delegates the House of Representatives would have. Southern representatives rebuked this idea completely and threatened to walk out of the Convention. Since the cooperation of the Southern states was crucial for the creation of a strong federal government, Northern delegates made considerable compromises. These compromises included extending the slave trade until 1808, the prohibition of taxing slave exports, and the implementation of the Fugitive Slave…
When the Mexican War ended, America was ceded western territories. This caused a problem on whether these new territories would be admitted as slave states or free states. To deal with this, Congress passed the Compromise of 1850 which basically made California free and allowed the people to pick in Utah and New Mexico. The ability of a state to decide whether it would allow slavery or not was called popular sovereignty.…
The state constitution in 1819, was what began of this compromise when James Tallmadge, a representative from New York attempted to add a anti- slavery amendment to the legislation. This gave a ugly and conflicted debate over slavery and the governments rights to restrict slavery. This Tallmadge amendment restricted all further introduction of slaves into Missouri and provided setting free once they reached the age of 25.This legislation was not passed, as the House of Representatives which was controlled by the North passed the idea, but it failed in the Senate which was equally divided between the North and the South. Although the legislation didn't pass it led to Henry Clay taking it on when Maine became a free state.…
Boasting about twenty percent of the U.S. citizen population in 1787, slaves were a noticeable presence, and a critical subject of discussion for the delegates of the Constitutional Convention. The state’s-rights supporting southern representatives wanted to use the increasing slave population to their advantage. Because the House of Representatives expressed membership based on population, recognizing the slaves as citizens would increase the southern presence in the lower-house of the bicameral legislature. The…
A) The three-fifths compromise made by James Wilson was to help the southern states maintain slavery. This was only as long as the southern states fought for the Northwest Ordinance, and proportional representation. The three-fifths compromise is one of the most well-known compromises. This compromise had the notion that slaves would count as three fifths of a person. This compromise would settle the debated issue over whether slaves were to be considered a human or property. In addition, it allowed the southern states to have a more proportional representation of their population. In The Summer of 1787, it states “Wilson’s new resolution required the allocation of seats in the House of Representatives on the basis of an equitable ratio of representation in proportion to the whole number of white & other free citizens & inhabitants . . . and three-fifths of all other persons not comprehended in the foregoing description, except Indians not paying taxes. . .” (Stewart 78). The compromise created an alliance with the large states and the south. This alliance not only assisted Wilson with his votes, but protected slavery for the south. Lastly, the Northwest Ordinance prohibited slavery in the new western territories. The new western territories were starting to become more popular, and a choice would have to be made on the issue of slavery laws would be. When Congressman Nathan Dane proposed the prohibition of slavery in these territories, many slave states agreed to the…
In 1820 the new territory on Missouri applied for statehood, this was the spark that turned into a flame with the debate over slave vs Free states. This became known as the Missouri Compromise. It caused tensions because it was west of the Mississippi River and outside the boundaries of the Union. In order to keep the states balanced, Congress came to the decision of making Missouri a slave state and Maine a slave state.…
Delegates with the strongest opposition to slavery, Martin, Mason, Dickenson, and Randolph, held that it was “inconsistent with the principles of the revolution and dishonorable to the American character to have such a feature in the Constitution.” Dickenson believed any compromise allowing “the importation of slaves… [to] be authorized to the States by the Constitution” would jeopardize the “honor and safety” of the country. These delegates felt so strongly on the topic that they were unwilling to compromise, and would “sooner risk the constitution” than agree to permit slavery or let it go untaxed. Of those four men only one signed the Constitution, clearly demonstrating their reluctance to compromise. Those advocating states’ rights in regards to slavery held an equally unmovable position, and believed that “we [the delegates] had nothing to do with the conduct of the States as to Slaves,” that right should be reserved to the states.…
While slavery in the United States always had its opponents, it wasn’t until 1787 that these detractors started to cause real obstacles for slave owners. During the Philadelphia Convention of 1787, one of the issues raised was whether slaves would be counted as part of the population in determining representation in the United States Congress or considered property not entitled to representation. In a head-to-head battle for power between the generally abolitionist northern states and the generally pro-slavery southern states, compromises of ½ proposed by Benjamin Harrison and ¾ by several New Englanders were rejected with the consensus finally agreeing on a 3/5 compromise proposed by James Madison. The 3/5 Compromise carried a heavy political toll in early America and gave the southern states a distinct political advantage until the abolition of slavery in 1865 with the ratification of the 13th amendment to the US Constitution.…
The ratification of the United States Constitution depended on the agreement of the North and the South, and the issue of slavery was a major obstruction to this agreement. Each state’s representation was determined by the number of person’s residing in that state. The North did not want to count the slaves as part of this number because it would mean less representation for them in the government. Their argument was that since slaves were considered property, they should be equated with other chattel property, like cattle and mules. The South, on the other hand, was determined to count slaves into their population due to the high proportion of slaves in the southern region of the country. Without the support of the South, the ratification of the Constitution was doubtful, so the 3/5 Compromise was written. Article 1, section 2 of the Constitution states that “population for the purposes of representation and taxation would be determined by adding the whole number of free people, including indentured servants, plus 3/5 of all slaves”. This was also called The Enumeration Clause.…
In the Missouri Compromise, Missouri applied for admission to the United States in 1819. Congress did no make any provisions to not allow for slavery in the area west of the Mississippi River. The north and the south differed over no more slaves being introduced into Missouri. Majority of the north agreed to this offer although most of the south was against it. The south did not want the north to control Congress and its…