The compromise of 1850 was a settlement on a series of issues plaguing the unity of the states. The primary issue to address was the institution of slavery, which was causing much dissension between the north and the south. Additional items to be addressed were territory issues and to prevent secession by the south. Henry Clay stepped forward to present a compromise, which had Congress in an eight-month discussion known as the “Great Debate”. As a result of the proposal, there were strong oppositions. One outspoken person who opposed the proposal was John C Calhoun. Calhoun was an intellectual southern politician, political philosopher and a proponent to the protection of Southern interests. He was an advocate for states’ rights and …show more content…
Webster believed the issue of slavery was settled long ago, when the regions were divided into slave and free states, and he also believed an agreement could be reached between the pro-slavery positions in the south and anti-slavery position in the north. Comparatively, Calhoun and Webster both saw the union was in danger of falling apart, they also both believed the issues of slavery between the north and the south was the major cause. Where they disagreed was on the future state of slavery. Calhoun saw the compromise as a betrayal of the south; he sought to have the northerners agree to the protection of slavery in the south so the south would remain in the union. Calhoun knew slavery pre-existed and believed it must continue to exist. Webster was more of a pacifist, he pleaded with the northerners to accept demands of the south in order to save the union, even though he did not accept the fact slavery needed to continue. Webster deeply believed that preservation of the union was more important than any other issue. In addition, William Henry Seward also opposed the proposed compromise. Seward was a New York politician and secretary of state and was one of the major political figures of the mid-nineteenth century; he became one of the most outspoken anti-slavery politicians of the period. Seward condemned Clay's resolutions on the
During the period of 1820-1861 the north and south debated on issues that dealt with slavery and unbalance power, in order to reduce sectional tension between these two states, the Missouri Compromise, Compromise of 1850, and the Kansas-Nebraska Act were proposed.
As a result of the Compromise of 1850, California was admitted as a free state, the territory disputed between Texas and New Mexico was surrendered to New Mexico, the slave trade was abolished in the District of Columbia, the Mexican Cession was open to popular sovereignty, and a stronger Fugitive Slave Law was enacted. In a speech to the Senate on March 7, 1850, Senator Daniel Webster stated his opinion that the North is wrong for not obeying the Fugitive Slave Law and that succession is amiss [Document D].The tone of Webster’s speech is objective as he attempts to see both sides- the North and the South. Webster is unbiased because as a Northern man, he agrees with the South. The peace was only temporary. The Fugitive Slave Law upset Northerners and the Underground Railroad became more active, peaking between 1850 and 1860. Massachusetts went so far as to making it a penal offense for a state official to enforce the act. The act also brought the issue of slavery into the limelight before the entire nation. In fact, by 1858, there was no avoiding the subject of slavery. During the Lincoln-Douglass Debates in a speech at Alton, Illinois on October 15, 1858, Abraham Lincoln stated that slavery was no longer just a political issue [Document G]. Slavery was splitting the nation and during the Second Great Awakening, even churches split over the issue. Lincoln’s speech is
The coexistence of a slave owning south with an increasingly anti-slavery north made conflict likely. It was formidable to decide whether such states like the ones gained from the Mexican War should be slavery or anti-slavery, which either way would disrupt the balance between the slave and antislavery states. This divided the Union and Confederacy even further. Later on, President Lincoln sought not to propose federal laws against slavery where it already existed, but he had in his 1858 House Divided speech, expressed a desire to “arrest the further spread of it “(Doc. G). Much of the political battle in the 1850s focused on the expansion of slavery into the newly created territories. All of the organized territories were likely to become free soil states which increased the southern movement toward secession. Both north and south assumed that if slavery could not expand it would become nonexistent. Southern fears of losing control of the federal government to anti-slavery forces, and northern feared that the slave power already controlled the government; these thoughts brought the sectional disagreements. The morality of slavery, the scope of democracy, and the economic merits of free labor versus slave plantations caused the Whig and know nothing parties to collapse and the free soil party to arrive, ruining the resolve of compromise.
Just as Northerners saw flaws in the Constitution, Southerners viewed it not to be perfect as well. President James Buchanan, a northern man with southern sympathies clarified, “As sovereign states, they and they alone, are responsible before God and the world for the slavery existing among them” (Document G). However, In Doc B, an anonymous writer defends the state’s rights that the constitution should protect slavery where it exists. The union will fall apart unless these rights are protected.
There were a plethora of decisions during the Continental Convention of 1787 which helped construct the United States of America that we have today. The participant who had the greatest impact on the convention other than James Madison, is a delegate called Roger Sherman. He was a very influential person who had many accomplishments, among these were: being a well-respected politician, a lawyer who earned his degree from Yale University, a Connecticut senator, a Newton County surveyor, an Associate Justice on the Supreme Court, and a member of the Continental Congress. All of these things, would help shape the man who would forever change the United States of America.
What was the 1850 Compromise and Why did it Fail? In 1850, Henry Clay one of the most influential political leaders in American history introduced a set of resolutions, which aimed to please both North and South America. The five proposals were rolled into a single 'omnibus' bill, which offered a solution to the growing sectional conflict over slavery and westward expansion, which arose from the 1846 Mexican War. The 1850 Compromise, which Senator Douglas stripped down and effectively helped pass, failed for a number of reasons, the greatest of which was that it was unable to please both anti-slave and pro-slave groups.
One of the main topics of concern for many decades was when new territories want to enter the union, will they be free or slave states? Henry Clay, one of the great compromisers, was able to work all sorts of different compromises on several issues throughout the years. One of his most famous compromises was the Missouri compromise. This allowed Missouri to enter the Union as a slave state, and every new state following would be free North of the Mason-Dixon line. This would try to stop the expansion of slavery, and for a short while, it did. During this time period, most Americans believed in manifest destiny, so they expanded westward. As many Southern’s moved west, they brought with them their slaves. Furthermore, they moved to places where slavery made economic sense, for example
In an essay that incorporates the textbook, lecture and power-point notes compare and contrast the compromises of 1820 and 1850.
The measures, a trade off planned by Whig Senator Henry Clay, who neglected to get them through himself, were shepherded to entry by Democratic Senator Stephen Douglas and Whig Senator Daniel Webster. The measures were contradicted by Senator and previous Vice-President John C. Calhoun. The Compromise was conceivable after the demise of President Zachary Taylor, who was in resistance. Succeeding him was an in number supporter of the trade off: Millard Fillmore. It briefly defused sectional strains in the United States, deferring the withdrawal emergency and the American Civil War. The Compromise dropped the Wilmot Proviso, which never got to be law however would have banned subjugation in domain gained from Mexico. Rather the Compromise further embraced the regulation of "Mainstream Sovereignty" for the Territory of New Mexico and the Territory of Utah. The different bargains reduced political controversy for a long time, until the relative respite was broken by the divisive Kansas-Nebraska Act. Basically it was a progression of bills set out to keep the country united. Despite the fact that it postponed progression, it is seen as just a makeshift fix..
In the beginning of the 19th century, slavery started to be debated and whether we should make it illegal. South of the nation absolutely despised the idea and wanted nothing to do with it. This soared a major dispute between the North and the South. One region wanted something and one wanted another. At a point, it was total chaos. It was then decided that Henry Clay needed to do something about it and of course proposed the Compromise of 1850.
In efforts to better understand the Civil War most historians examine the Sectional Crisis and the Compromise of 1850 in the decades leading up to the worst years in American History. Some historians prefer to focus on the underlying theme of the war, others tightly examine individual leaders, events, and political parties, connecting them all together like puzzle pieces to define the years prior to the war. Despite the contrasting views, it is clear to realize the constant prevailing issues of the Antebellum Period, the Sectional Crisis and the Compromise of 1850. In particular, the Compromise of 1850 is deceivingly taught as only establishing 3 pivotal elements: the status of slavery in future territories (popular sovereignty), California statehood, and the fugitive slave law. Granted these elements of the compromise provide a great amount of controversy long after their birth, but one element of the compromise perceives to fail in obtaining recognition. The Texas-New Mexico boundary resolution seems to find itself fading away from its relevancy to the civil war, shadowed by more prominent issues regarding the stability of the Union. Abandoning the traditional teaching of the compromise, the Texas-New Mexico border decision figuratively and literally changed the identity of Texas. This was the long awaited result caused by deep rooted social and political issues dating back to the Texas Revolution.
African-Americans may sometimes wonder at the contradictory facts about their history presented in many standard history texts. These texts state that blacks were given the right to vote in 1870, yet the same texts will acknowledge that this right did not really exist for African-Americans until the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s.
Through out the history of America, there were many compromises made as a desperate attempt to make both groups of people of either side happy as much as they could. In this case, the United States tried to avoid war with a series of political compromises in an attempt to reduce sectional tensions between the North and South, which proved to be ineffective.
Correspondingly, there was the quarrel over state versus federal rights. States felt they didn’t have any say if they disliked a federal law. So when all these compromises came about concerning slavery in the West, people wanted to be able to nullify federal laws. To nullify is to cancel, and in this case to cancel a federal law. People like John C. Calhoun fought for this right along with many others. However, the federal government felt this was not necessary, therefore, some states threatened to secede.
In Lincolns second inaugural he coined a famous phrase saying "Both read the same Bible and pray to the same God, and each invokes His aid against the other." (Perret 48)Other problems would arise concerning slavery such as which states would be admitted as free or slave states. Several compromises were made in order to avoid tensions rising such as the “Missouri Compromise”. Yet again we see later on by the repeal of this act by the “Kansas Nebraska” act that things remain unstable. Tensions would rise again when we acquired the new territories from Mexico. For several years it caused tensions with the South wanting slavery and the North opposed to it. Eventually the Compromise of 1850 would quell the tensions.