ipl-logo

Comparison Of Political Compromises Between 1820 To 1861

939 Words4 Pages

The period between 1820 to 1861 saw much internal conflict concerning the United States of America, particularly between the North with New England, the South, and the West with the frontier territories. While one may primarily attribute such “sectional tensions” with slavery, it is imperative that they consider the broad range of topics and issues that were associated with such conflicts. These issues vary, but most include economic hardships by method of protective tariffs imposed by the “tyrannical North”, as from the perspective of both the southern plantation owner and frontier farmer, the awful and brutal act of slavery, as viewed from a Northern abolitionist i.e William Lloyd Garrison, and a lack of feeling represented, a key feature …show more content…

Notable people like Henry Clay were dubbed compromisers because of their effective works; however, a longer look and analysis at these compromises reveals that while they may be effective short term, these tensions were actually worsening, much like pressure building up inside of a pot used for cooking. On a fundamental scale, these compromises were flawed, the three sections of the country each interpreted them differently and these interpretations resulted in illegal moves (Bloody Kansas), increased conflict (South Carolina’s Nullification Crisis), finally building up to secession from the Union by the South and war. Still though, these compromises did prove beneficial to an extent, as they indirectly gave the population more of a say in their daily life and made life better for those people. When viewing these compromises from the perspective of the different sections, these benefits are purely objective and stand as common ground for all …show more content…

The North and South were divided on whether or not slavery was permitted to exist. When the Missouri Compromise was made, it maintained balance by “allowing Missouri to enter as a slave state and Maine as a free state”[4]. Such balance was vital, because in the perspective of the North, the better the containment of slavery in the south, the less of a chance that it could spread. Furthermore, in terms of sectional tensions, the Missouri Compromise proved adequate short term. It’s advocation of the rights of citizens gave the people of Missouri the option to create a state government that could “write a state constitution that would permit slavery”[2]. This ability gave more say to the people, increasing the level in democracy, and as a result limiting the sectional tensions between the North, South, and West. However, where the Missouri Compromise appealed to all the sections of the sections short-term, it falls short severely long term. The Thomas Amendment implicitly proves this,

Show More
Related

  • Dbq Missouri Compromise

    595 Words  | 3 Pages

    Leslie Chihuahua United States History to 1877 11/13/2015 11:00-11:50 AM Missouri Compromise was an agreement from the House of Representatives to reach a median to keep slavery out of Missouri after all the tribulations it had caused before it became a state. Henry Clay, Speaker of the House made important decisions in order for Missouri to be admitted as a state that could impact American history. In 1819, slavery was a resourceful profit to slave owners and this sparked a sectional controversy in the country over the efforts to expand slavery into the new western territories. The country had 22 states, eleven free eleven slave, and the line between them were distinguished by the northern and western boundaries of Pennsylvania and the Ohio River. (Txt.

    Read More

  • Differences Between 1850 And Missouri Compromise Of 1850

    575 Words  | 3 Pages

    So, this essay will explain one from the other. The Missouri Compromise has many differences from the Compromise of 1850. One difference would be that in breaking up the different parts of the Louisiana Territory, it created peace between Northerners and Southerners. The Northerners were happy that more territory was safe for freed slaves, although they weren't quite happy that there was still slavery in the USA. However, the southerners stayed happy until the Southerners realized that this gave congress a say in which states could have slavery.

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Political Compromise Between 1850 And 1860

    773 Words  | 4 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • What Are The Causes Of The Missouri Compromise

    205 Words  | 1 Pages

    The Missouri Compromise was made as an attempt to deal with the debate that had been going on about slavery. It lasted thirty-four years, but never truly made the North orouth totally happy with the situation. Although the Missouri Compromise did push back the debate on slavery in Missouri, it did not solve the problem as a whole. The tension between the North and South was, in fact reduced for a period of time. Once the Missouri Compromise was declared unconstitutional, the tension once again grew.

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast The Conflict Between 1820 And 1860

    496 Words  | 2 Pages

    Compromise, a resolution of a conflict that is achieved only if both sides come to a mutual conscientious, was used to terminate political conflicts. The North and South relied heavily on this aspect since they had two distinct perspectives regarding slavery. However, compromise did not have the great effect as it was visioned because it furthered tension between the North and South by rewarding the South fully with slavery. The Missouri Compromise of 1820 initially was seen as just because there was a 36°30 N line established to balance the amount of free and slave states.

    Read More

  • Conflict Between 1820 And 1860 Dbq Essay

    924 Words  | 4 Pages

    In the declaration of the National Anti-Slavery Convention , it was stated “that every american citizen who retains a human being an involuntary bondage as his property is a man stealer”, and that “slaves ought instantly to be set free”(Document B). Because of this, they also claimed that “congress has a right... to suppress the domestic slave trade between the several states, and to abolish slavery and those portions of our territory which the constitution has placed under its exclusive jurisdiction”(Document B) .The North was no longer tolerating slavery in any part of the union, which led to turmoil between the North and the South. Also, in the past, the North was known to evade established compromises regarding slavery. Among individuals and the legislators of the North, there has been“a disinclination to perform fully their constitutional duties in regard to the return of persons bound to service with escaped into the free states”.

    Read More

  • Articles Of Confederation And The Constitution Dbq

    831 Words  | 4 Pages

    Another Compromise made was the Three Fifths Compromise. It was the debate on whether the slaves should count in the population of each state. The compromise was that each slave would be counted as three fifths of a person. While this benefited the southern states in terms of having more representatives in Congress, they had to pay more to the

    Read More

  • Constitutional Convention In 1787

    420 Words  | 2 Pages

    The cause of the rebellion caused national leaders to worry about government that could not control rebellions and prevent violence. The struggles that the constitution faced was solved, by starting compromises. The first compromise was the Great Compromise written by Roger Sherman called for a bicameral legislature. This compromise was between small and large states of the colonies and combined the demands that both large and small states needed. The end result of the Great Compromise was that it resolved representation by population in the House of Representatives and equal representation in the Senate as well.

    Read More

  • Confederation Vs Congress

    570 Words  | 3 Pages

    It not only required compromises but it also initiated controversy between the states over who had the most influence and representation in congress. The bigger states wanted population as their representation, while the smaller ones just wanted equality and their voices heard in congress. (2)Amid the verbal skirmish, a man named Roger Sherman ended it and proposed that two houses, one senate and one representative, be established.(4) Silencing the disagreements, Sherman’s idea led to what would be known as the Great Compromise. Now the south had slaves in their hands and wanted them to make up part of the population, and the north was opposed.

    Read More

  • Essay On The Compromise Of 1790

    1895 Words  | 8 Pages

    “It was observed, that as the pill would be a bitter one to the Southern States, something should be done to soothe them,” said Thomas Jefferson in a letter to George Washington when referring to the Compromise of 1790. The pill he referred to was assumption, and the just measure was moving the capital to the Potomac River in between Virginia and Maryland. The Compromise of 1790 had political conflict in the issues of assumption and residence. It had compromise in the deal between Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison, leading to the passing of both the Assumption Bill and the Residence Act. The Compromise of 1790 was a vital compromise between Hamilton, Madison, and Jefferson that resolved serious voting conflicts in Congress, thus stabilizing early political government.

    Read More

  • Michael Holt The Fate Of Their Country Summary

    595 Words  | 3 Pages

    The fate of their country by Michael Holt is a book made up of 3 to 4 sections, titled  Pandora's Box, The Wilmot Proviso, The Compromise of 1850, The Kansas-Nebraska Act. Author Michael Holt examines what caused the Civil War and the Pandora’s Box of sectional dissent territorial slavery issue over slavery into all current and future western territories also the Missouri crisis debate. It wasn’t slavery per the book but the debates about the extension of slavery into new territories and states that sent the nation careening into civil war, argues writer Michael Holt. He gives his readers an analysis of the partisan political forces, on the great debate over the extension of slavery into the American West.

    Read More

  • Dbq Nationalism And Sectionalism

    829 Words  | 4 Pages

    Thesis Both Nationalism and Sectionalism developed concurrently during the Era of Good Feelings. The two main reasons why nationalism increased was because of Henry Clay’s American System and Monroe’s policy to increase nationalism. Clay’s AS created a better national infrastructure that tightened America together. Monroe’s policy was to promote national unity and America’s power, which strengthens nationalism.

    Read More

  • Compromises Between 1820 And 1860

    1121 Words  | 5 Pages

    There were many important Compromises between the years of 1820 and 1860, some that worked completely and some that didn’t. In the early nineteenth century, people were good at compromising and making things work for everyone. How long did perfect compromising actually last? Slavery began to split the nation apart, causing compromising to become hard to do.

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Missouri Compromise And The Compromise Of 1850

    401 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Missouri Compromise and the Compromise of 1850 were attempts to bring the nation together but ended up pulling it apart. The Missouri Compromise's goal was to end the feud on the border for free and slave states, end the feud on Missouri becoming a free or slave state. The solution for the border was to have an imaginary line at 36 degrees, 30' minutes anything above the line, with an acception of Missouri, would be free and anything below the line would be slave. The solution to Missouri becoming free or slave was Maine would become a free state and Missouri would become a slave state to keep the number of slave states and the number of free states equal. In time the Missouri Compromise would tear the nation apart despite its intentions.

    Read More

  • Pros And Cons Of The Missouri Compromise

    198 Words  | 1 Pages

    Class, The Missouri Compromise did not effectively deal with the sectional conflict over slavery. This is because the compromise did not result in a definite solution that left both sides pleased but instead left neither side content (Kennedy 235). If the sectional conflict was resolved, this could have helped to prevent the secession of the southern states in the American Civil War, or this could have caused the American Civil War to start sooner rather than later. I believe that the North got the better side of the deal. At this time, the North and the South were worried about political and economic balances, and it seems like this compromise gave the North an advantage (Kennedy 234).

    Read More

More about Comparison Of Political Compromises Between 1820 To 1861

Open Document