The differences between North and South were far to great and compromise did not stand a chance at preventing the impending conflict. This was most clearly shown in the ways in which the three main compromises, the Missouri Compromise, the Compromise of and the Kansas-Nebraska Act, failed.
In Missouri wanted to join the Union as a slave state. As this would ruin the balance between Slave states and Free states in the Senate, Henry Clay proposed the Missouri compromise. This arranged it that while Missouri was admitted as a Slave state, Maine was also admitted as a free state. It also created an imaginary line along the 36o latitude, where slavery was allowed below it but prevented above it.
However they limited themselves by only applying the Compromise to lands gained in the Louisiana purchase. This led to conflict after the Mexican war in which America gained new territories in the West. This doomed the Missouri Compromise, which was probably the most promising of the three. Had the Compromise been applied to all American lands then perhaps it could have succeeded.
John Calhoun later resigned. Both of these issues, the Missouri Compromise and the Nullification Crisis demonstrate that America was indeed having issues over slavery. The south felt slavery was an economic need, but the north felt differently in regards to slavery. Our government differed on opinions and was quick to threaten with the US army to intervene. What were the major economic, humanitarian, political, and social arguments for and against Indian removal?
One of the major arguments for the Indian removal was due to a mass increase in cotton. The invention of cotton made farmers need more land for their cotton plantations, which in return led to the increase of pressure on Indian land. Another argument for Indian removal was that most of the Americans felt they were better than the Indians mainly due to their skin color and ethnicity.
Americans felt that they had control and power and could remove the Indians from the land. Social arguments against Indian removal were how they wanted to integrate the Indians into American society, i.
One of the major political arguments in the Indian removal made many feel that it was wrong to change or get rid of any agreements that they had made with the Indians. To some it can be a work of art, a true masterpiece, but to others it can be seen as simply just a painting. To me at first I saw simply just a painting, I did not see it as anything special but when I started toying with the colors and hues and saturations Both nationalism and sectionalism increased during the Era of Good Feelings, however, nationalism became of greater importance in economics and politics.
For decades Southerners had apologized for slavery as a necessary evil; but when they advocated spreading it by accepting it in Missouri, Northerners cried foul. But for all this, the center held, at least enough to reach a compromise in and usher Missouri into the Union in A coalition of moderate Northerners and Southerners was able to come together to achieve compromise. Once they voted for compromise, especially the Northerners took an enormous amount of abuse from their constituents and political enemies.
In response, these moderates did as they had always done, in appealing to the priority of Union over their particular stance on slavery. Preserving the Union and the sovereignty of states like Missouri, they pled, were the true issues at stake here — not the increase of slavery in the United States.
They thus advanced and refined arguments that had been used by sectional moderates in previous sectional struggles such as during the War of But it was more than arguments that held the anti-restrictionist coalition together.
In Massachusetts it might be raising the specter of the Federalists returning to power if the restriction prevailed. Nowhere was that pressure stronger than in Maine, whose long drive for separation from Massachusetts stood in jeopardy when Congressional leaders linked Maine statehood with Missouri statehood. If doughfaces were on the defensive in other states, this move put Maine restrictionists in a bind.
But for all the importance of the compromises that terminated both active rounds of the Missouri crisis, that sustained conflict had ushered in a new clarity in the sectional politics of the United States and moved each section toward greater coherence on the slavery issue.
In the immediate future, the legacy of Missouri hung heavily over all partisan and sectional politics throughout the s. What John Quincy Adams observed relative to presidential politics was true well beyond that sphere as well: But whether for the s, the s, or beyond, the Missouri Crisis pointed to new directions in the antebellum era.
With every new controversy sectional polarization followed patterns that would be familiar to the Missouri combatants. And while moderates in both sections were not helpless in the face of the divide over slavery, recurring iterations of the Missouri crisis would stretch their resources and arguments to the limit.
Slavery and Politics in the Early American Republic. University of North Carolina Press, Cambridge University Press, The Missouri Compromise and Its Aftermath: Slavery and the Meaning of America. Deliver Us From Evil: The Slavery Question in the Old South. Oxford University Press,
- The Missouri Compromise Slavery and the Civil War Research Task- Describe the role of the Missouri Compromise in the campaign against slavery. The .
The Missouri Compromise essays By , a heated controversy over whether or not Missouri was to be admitted to the Union as a slave state or as a free state was underway. Before Missouri.
The Missouri Compromise Slavery and the Civil War By Stephen Waters Research Task- Describe the role of the Missouri Compromise in the campaign against slavery! The Missouri Compromise played a . The Missouri Compromise was the replacement and answer to the Tallmadge act, which it excluded. The Missouri Compromise was lead by Congressman Henry Clay came as a two part solution to the admission problem/5(8).
Read this American History Essay and over 88, other research documents. The Missouri Compromise. The Missouri Compromise Essay written by Unknown A compromise is when two or more parties in disagreement reach an agreement /5(1). Missouri Compromise Essay - Missouri Compromise In , the territory of Missouri applied for statehood. It was the first new state to be taken from the land acquired in the Louisiana Purchase. The issue of Missouri attempting to become a state sparked much debate and controversy.