1. Why did the South perceive the Wilmot Proviso as such a threat? What did the proviso indicate about the North's attitude toward slavery? Answer: Wilmot Proviso was apart of the Democratic Party from Pennsylvania.
The Missouri Compromise was definite attempt by the government to shove the issue out of view. By the time the Missouri Compromise was introduced, a few northern states were already in the process of abolishing slavery, as was England. The government was finally recognizing the cruelties of slavery but did not want to anger the southern plantation owners. Thus, they created the Missouri Compromise in order to ease their guilt and face the least contempt. The Missouri Compromise was only able to increase the brewing conflict of slavery between northern states and southern states.
The Missouri Compromise was a rule that regulated slavery in the southern states. America did this to even out the Non-Slave states and the Slavery states. This compromise was made in 1820 by Henry Clay. Henry Clay was a lawyer and a politician that was very involved in the Missouri Compromise of 1820.
The Missouri Compromise greatly limited the growth and development of slavery in the United States. It allowed Missouri to become a state, and to allow slaves, and Maine, as a free state. The compromise also prohibited the practice of slavery in the northern portion of the Louisiana Territory. By this time, the importation of slaves from Africa had been outlawed, and they could only be purchased within the country. This meant also meant, that states that entered would be free states.
In the early 1800’s, and before, the United States prided itself on its ability to discuss political issues and express opinions without violence. However, around the 1850’s and 1860’s, emotions were escalating, and political compromise was thrown out the window. This was because the major political debate at the time was slavery, an issue that throughout America’s entire history was shown to create very strong opinions. Another reason for this change is that northerners and southerners were unwilling to communicate with each other in any meaningful way. Slavery was an issue for the United States since it before it even became a country, and if the Three Fifths Compromise had not been made, America may never have become independent.
These were a big deal involving slavery because they either strengthened slavery or made it seem like it was going to end all together. To the South, the thought of slavery ending was a complete disaster. In Document 9: Excerpt from the Dred Scott Decision, shows how Scott saw the Missouri Compromise. He says, “(I)t is the opinion of this court that the Act of Congress (the Missouri Compromise) which prohibited a citizen from holding and owning property of this kind (slaves) in the territory of the United States north of the line therein mentioned,...” This quote from his speech says he thinks that the Missouri Compromise was a good thing because it prohibited people who own slaves to cross the North and South border with their “property” or slaves.
It forced them to travel all the way to Canada instead of closer free states to find freedom. Even though it was part of a compromise between the North and the South act favored the South. In 1820, the Missouri Compromise was created to help resolve the debate over the border of slave and free state. It only lasted for about thirty years before the South and North started to debate over what was a free state and slave state over the new territory on the West Coast.
The issue the compromise was about was whether there should be slavery in the western territories. Maine wanted to be added to the Union, however, slavery was banned there. If Maine were to be added to the Union, it would upset the balance between free and slave states in the nation and the Senate. So, the Missouri Compromise, proposed by Senator Henry Clay, allowed Maine to enter the Union as a free state, and allowed Missouri to be entered into the Union as a slave state.
In January of 1820, the Missouri Compromise set a boundary line between free and slave territory. It was an effort by Congress to resolve the sectional and political rivalries. The Missouri Compromise was criticized by many southerners because it established the principle that Congress could make laws regarding slavery. But northerners condemned it for accepting in the expansion of slavery. However, the act helped hold the Union together for more than thirty years.
It did not outlaw slavery, nor did it stop slavery from continuing on in different forms, such as
The most important cause for rising tensions in the 1850s would be the Compromise of 1850. Though it was labeled a compromise, it failed to dampen hostilities between pro- slavery and anti-slavery groups. It many cases it revealed that pro-slavery interests had more power in the government that it would appear from the number of slave states. One of the largest reasons that this issue was so divisive is that is failed to achieve either side expect result in regard to the Mexican cessation. Many years prior the Missouri compromise established a latitude line that would separate free and slave states.
Talk about the future of slavery stirred up problems, so Representative David Wilmot of Pennsylvania introduced a possible solution. "... Neither slavery or involuntary servitude shall ever exist in any part of said territory, except for crime, whereof the party shall first be dully convicted" (Wilmot par 4). But due to unwilling southern politicians, the Wilmot Proviso never passed because it was deemed unconstitutional. Although the Wilmot Proviso was never seen through, just four years later, Congress passed the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854. This new act allowed the citizens of those two states to determine the fate of their states.
When Henry Clay created the Compromise of 1850, his intent was to reduce sectional tension between the North and South, or more specifically, the free and slave states. In awarding each side a part of their list of grievances, the Compromise was supposed to appease the divided the country and stop a conflict. Unfortunately, the Compromise was not successful in its intent. It further divided the country due to the loopholes found in the Compromise´s words. The North got the upperhand of the Compromise of 1850 due to the region's power in the Senate, their unwillingness to obey the laws, and the idea of popular sovereignty.
It was the Underground Railroad that caused so many slaves being able to get to safety. With a large number of slaves escaping using this method, slave owners convinced congress to pass the Fugitive Slave Act. Compromise of 1850, this was a series of legislation passed by Congress. This is the law that is known as the Fugitive Slave Law. The Compromise was comprised of several laws, and they stated that in District of Columbia slave trading was outlawed, but it was up to the state of Maryland to decide if there would be slavery, interstate slave trade could not be stopped by Congress, California became a free state under this law, voting would decide it slavery would be allowed in place like New Mexico and Utah, and it was illegal to aid or
The Missouri Compromise of 1820 was an attempt by Congress to ease some of the political rivalries between the North and the South (history.com 2009). The compromise stated the fact that all states up north would not have slavery and all states south would allow and continue the act of slavery (history.com 2009). It went both ways since it split the country up evenly between slave and free. The Missouri Compromise of 1820 was handwritten by Henry Clay in 1820 (ancestralfindings.com 1995). On March 6th of 1820, President James Monroe signed the Missouri Compromise and made it the new law of the land (loc.gov 2017).