Transcript of Missouri Compromise (1820)

Missouri Compromise summary: The Missouri Compromise of 1820 was an effort by the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives to maintain a balance of power between the slaveholding states and free states. The slaveholding states feared that if they became outnumbered in Congressional representation that they would lack the power to protect their interests in property and trade.

Missouri Applies For Statehood In 1819, the slaveholding territory of Missouri applied for admission to the Union. Northern states opposed it, feeling that Southern slaveholding states held too much power already. The Constitution allowed states to count each slave as three-fifths of a person for purposes of determining population, and therefore, the number of Congressional representatives the state was entitled to. This had given the South an advantage in Congress.

Slavery In The Northwest Territory Slavery had already been creeping into the Northwest Territory (the area between the Ohio River and the Great Lakes), even though the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 prohibited slavery there. Southerners migrating into that region took their slaves with them under the guise of indentured servitude, which was legal in the area. Northerners, most of whom favored "free states" in which slavery was prohibited, feared slavery would become de facto in the states carved from the Northwest Territory. The admission of Missouri, which came from lands obtained through the Louisiana Purchase and lay outside the Old Northwest, added to their fears of the expansion of slavery.
Representative Jame Tallmadge, Jr., of New York offered two amendments to the Missouri statehood bill on Feb. 13, 1819. The first prohibited any further importation of slaves into Missouri; the second required gradual emancipation for the slaves already there. The House passed his amendments, along strictly regional voting lines, but the Senate, where representation of free and slaveholding states were balanced, rejected it.
Congressional debates on the issue raged for a year until the District of Maine, originally part of Massachusetts, sought statehood. Henry Clay of Kentucky, the Speaker of the House, maintained that if Maine were to be admitted, then Missouri should be, too. From this came the notion that states be admitted in pairs, one slave and one free. Senator Jesse B. Thomas of Illinois proposed an amendment allowing slavery below the parallel 36 degrees, 30 minutes in the vast Louisiana Purchase territory, but prohibiting it above that line. That parallel was chosen because it ran approximately along the southern border of Missouri.

The Missouri Compromise Becomes Law The Missouri Compromise, after much debate, passed the Senate on March 2, 1820, and the House on February 26, 1821.
Though the compromise measure quelled the immediate divisiveness engendered by the Missouri question, it intensified the larger regional conflict between North and South. It served notice to the North that Southerners not only did not intend for slavery to end, they wanted to expand its presence. In the South, the belief grew that Northerners were using slavery as a smokescreen behind which they could resurrect the Federalist Party and strengthen the central government at the expense of states’ rights.
For nearly 30 years, the compromise worked, with two states being admitted together, one slave, one free. Then, in 1850, California was admitted as a stand-alone free state, upsetting the balance 16–15, in exchange for a Congressional guarantee no restrictions on slavery would be placed on the territories of Utah or New Mexico and passage of the Fugitive Slave Act, which required citizens of all states to return any runaway slaves to their masters. In 1857, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Congress had no right to prohibit slavery in territories, as part of the decision in the Dred Scott case. The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 repealed the 36-30 dividing line for slavery in the Louisiana Purchase area.

The Compromise of 1850

Background of the compromise

HENRY CLAY of Kentucky, JOHN C. CALHOUN of South Carolina, and DANIEL WEBSTER of Massachusetts dominated national politics from the end of the War of 1812 until their deaths in the early 1850s. Although none would ever be President, the collective impact they created in Congress was far greater than any President of the era, with the exception of Andrew Jackson. There was one issue that loomed over the nation throughout their time in power — slavery. They were continuously successful in keeping peace in America by forging a series of compromises.

After 30 years in Congress and three unsuccessful attempts at the Presidency, Clay wanted badly to make good with yet another nation-saving deal. He put forth a set of eight proposals that he hoped would pass muster with his colleagues.Each time Clay's Compromise was set forth for a vote, it did not receive a majority. Henry Clay himself had to leave in sickness, before the dispute could be resolved. In his place, Stephen Douglas worked tirelessly to end the fight. On July 9, President ZACHARY TAYLOR died of food poisoning. His successor, MILLARD FILLMORE, was much more interested in compromise. The environment for a deal was set. By September, Clay's Compromise became law.

Compromise of 1850

California was admitted to the Union as the 16th free state. In exchange, the south was guaranteed that no federal restrictions on slavery would be placed on Utah or New Mexico. Texas lost its boundary claims in New Mexico, but the Congress compensated Texas with $10 million. Slavery was maintained in the nation's capital, but the slave trade was prohibited. Finally, and most controversially, a FUGITIVE SLAVE LAW was passed, requiring northerners to return runaway slaves to their owners under penalty of law.

North Gets / South Gets
California admitted as a free state / No slavery restrictions in Utah or New Mexico territories
Slave Trade prohibited in Washington D.C. / Slaveholding permitted in Washington D.C.
Texas loses boundary dispute with New Mexico / Texas gets $10 million
Fugitive Slave Law

Who won and who lost in the deal? Although each side received benefits, the north seemed to gain the most. The balance of the Senate was now with the free states, although California often voted with the south on many issues in the 1850s. The major victory for the south was the Fugitive Slave Law. In the end, the north refused to enforce it. Massachusetts even called for its nullification, stealing an argument from John C. Calhoun. Northerners claimed the law was unfair. The flagrant violation of the Fugitive Slave Law set the scene for the tempest that emerged later in the decade. But for now, Americans hoped against hope that the fragile peace would prevail.

The Kansas Nebraska Act of 1854

The KANSAS-NEBRASKA ACT OF 1854 may have been the single most significant event leading to the Civil War. By the early 1850s settlers and entrepreneurs wanted to move into the area now known as Nebraska. However, until the area was organized as a territory, settlers would not move there because they could not legally hold a claim on the land. The southern states' representatives in Congress were in no hurry to permit a Nebraska territory because the land lay north of the 36°30' parallel — where slavery had been outlawed by the Missouri Compromise of 1820. Just when things between the north and south were in an uneasy balance, Kansas and Nebraska opened fresh wounds.

The person behind the Kansas-Nebraska Act was SENATOR STEPHEN A. DOUGLAS of Illinois.He said he wanted to see Nebraska made into a territory and, to win southern support, proposed a southern state inclined to support slavery. It was Kansas. Underlying it all was his desire to build a transcontinental railroad to go through Chicago. The Kansas-Nebraska Act allowed each territory to decide the issue of slavery on the basis of popular sovereignty. Kansas with slavery would violate the Missouri Compromise, which had kept the Union from falling apart for the last thirty-four years. The long-standing compromise would have to be repealed. Opposition was intense, but ultimately the bill passed in May of 1854. Territory north of the sacred 36°30' line was now open to popular sovereignty. The North was outraged.

The political effects of Douglas' bill were enormous. Passage of the bill irrevocably split the Whig Party, one of the two major political parties in the country at the time. Every northern Whig had opposed the bill; almost every southern Whig voted for it. With the emotional issue of slavery involved, there was no way a common ground could be found. Most of the southern Whigs soon were swept into the Democratic Party. Northern Whigs reorganized themselves with other non-slavery interests to become the REPUBLICAN PARTY, the party of Abraham Lincoln. This left the Democratic Party as the sole remaining institution that crossed sectional lines. Animosity between the North and South was again on the rise. The North felt that if the Compromise of 1820 was ignored, the Compromise of 1850 could be ignored as well. Violations of the hated Fugitive Slave Law increased.

ABRAHAM LINCOLN laid out his objections to the Act and resurrected his political career in a brilliant speech at Peoria on October 16, 1854. In it he vigorously attacked the repeal of the Missouri Compromise line, noting that restricting slavery above that geographical boundary had been a southern concession to match northerners' accession to allowing Missouri to enter the Union as a slave state. Now that concession had been inexplicably withdrawn, and with it, the sixty year old policy of restricting the expansion of slavery. Lincoln criticized popular sovereignty, questioning how it was that this doctrine could supersede the famed Northwest Ordinance and the sacred Missouri Compromise.

Most importantly, Lincoln attacked the morality of slavery's extension and of slavery itself, while tempering this assault on the "peculiar institution" with moderate rhetoric toward the South. Douglas's contentions were perfectly acceptable if the black man (Lincoln used the archaic term "Negro") were no different than a hog. But Lincoln argued for the humanity of the slaves. They were people, not animals, and consequently possessed certain natural rights. "If the negro is a man, why then my ancient faith teaches me that `all men are created equal;' and that there can be no moral right in connection with one man's making a slave of another." Still, Lincoln attached no blame to the South for slavery, and confessed that he was not ready to accept black social and political equality. Though he strongly condemned any extension of slavery, he was still willing to tolerate even that to preserve the Union. Despite the radical nature of some of his statements, Lincoln was still a Whig, not an abolitionist.

Name: ______Pd: _____

Compromise of 1850

  1. Take a blank map of the United States. Make a color key. Color the map according to the Compromise of 1850:

Free States, Free Territory, Slave States, Slave Territory,

  1. Draw the “imaginary line” across the U.S. representing the Missouri Compromise. (From Atlantic to Pacific)
  1. What were three main parts of the Compromise of 1850?
  2. Explain why the Missouri Compromise line did not apply to California’s Statehood.

Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854

Make a color key. Color the map according to the following regions in the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854. Draw in the Missouri Compromise Line of 1820.

Free States, Free Territory, Decision on Slavery left to the People of the Territory, Slave State, Slave Territory, Indian Territory

Answer these questions:

  1. How did the Kansas-Nebraska Act change the Missouri Compromise?
  1. What slave states joined the Union between 1820 and 1854?
  1. Why did Lincoln oppose the Kansas-Nebraska Act?
  1. If the Kansas Nebraska Act had not been passed, how would this have affected sectionalism? Why do you think this?

Missouri Compromise of 1820

On the map above, make a key and color code the areas: Free States, Slave States, States created by Missouri Compromise, Compromise line, free territories, slave territories, Spanish Territory, the Oregon Country

Answer the following questions based on the Missouri Compromise:

1 What was the earlier Congressional decision on slavery in the Northwest territory? How had people responded to this?

  1. How and why was the line drawn dividing the nation between slave and free states?
  1. What was the agreement on adding free states and slave states?
  1. Explain why the Missouri Compromise lasted for 30 years, but ultimately did not answer the slave questions.