Preview

In the Early Nineteenth Century, Americans Sought to Resolve Their Political Disputes Through Compromise, Yet by 1860 This No Longer Seemed Possible. Analyze the Reasons for This Change. Use the Documents and Your

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
986 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
In the Early Nineteenth Century, Americans Sought to Resolve Their Political Disputes Through Compromise, Yet by 1860 This No Longer Seemed Possible. Analyze the Reasons for This Change. Use the Documents and Your
The North and South in the nineteenth century were different in lifestyle and morale as well as economy. The north had a booming industrial economy while in the South, cotton was king. Because of this, congress was continuously addressing controversial matters and providing answers that did not satisfy either one side or both. The early 1800s were full of the North and the South making many attempts at reconciliation that just fell short. Among those were the Missouri Compromise of 1820, and the Great Compromise of 1850. Other tempestuous attempts led to the Tariff/Nullification Controversy, anti slavery debates in congress, and the Kansas-Nebraska Act. Whether it was one side or the other, there was always someone to oppose - and in some cases, defy - the laws put in place, which eventually led to the succession of the southern states and the Civil War.
The issue of slavery became an even greater concern when the Louisiana Purchase territories were to enter the Union as states. The question was, would new territories enter the Union as slave or free states? The South wanted a balance of power. They knew that if the North were to have more free states, then slavery in the south could be facing extinction through congress. In an attempt to conciliate with the South, the North agreed upon the Missouri Compromise of 1820. Through this, slavery was banned above the 36 degrees 30 minute line and Missouri entered as a slave state, Maine a free state. For a while, it retained the balance of power. However, tempers in the south rose again later in the 1820s over high tariffs. The tariffs benefitted the north but threatened southern cotton exports. In 1828, the tariff was around 50%. President Jackson modified it to around 33% in 1832 only to have South Carolina nullify it in the state. It raised the question of whether or not the federal government could legally impose protective tariffs and whether it was constitutional for a state to nullify a federal law. "South
Continue Reading
View Writing Issues

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    South Carolina Nullification
    • 794 Words
    • 4 Pages

    South Carolina Nullification

    In early 1860’s the Civil war took place, against the North and the South parts of America. In the time that was taken to reach the civil war, many small disagreements and arguments took place that eventually led to having an immense war. However, around three decades earlier, South Carolina had been having disagreements with the federal government. On May 19, 1928 the Congress of the United States passed the Tariff of 1828. The tariff was designed to protect industries in the northern United States which were being driven out of business, by low-priced imported goods by putting tax on them. Well it seems as if this was a great idea, until, the south started to feel the effects of it, on their antebellum economy. The south called the tariff of 1828, “Tariff of Abominations”. “South Carolina felt that the protective features of tariffs were harmful to them and they also claimed that they were unconstitutional because they favored North over the South.” (u-s-history.com)A government should serve their people with equality and liberty. Instead the federal government chose to be unfair and help the north because that’s where they…

    • 794 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Controversy Before the Civil War
    • 423 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Controversy Before the Civil War

    During the expansion westward of United States, controversy between the Northern and the Southern States quickly arose. This was primarily due to the disagreement of what these new western territories would become- free or slave states. The Southern States wanted these new territories to support slavery so they could send more pro-slavery senators/ representatives to Congress, which was the opposite for the Northern States. Many important events from 1845-1861 quickly led to the start of the Civil War due to these Northern and Southern disputes.…

    • 423 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Causes of the Civil War
    • 661 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Causes of the Civil War

    The issue on slavery was one of the causes of the Civil War. Slavery and slave trades had become a big part of the South’s economy. During the 19th Century, the North worked hard on abolishing slavery, which they thought was a disgrace to the Union. Compromises were proposed working toward an end to slavery. One of the compromises was the Missouri Compromise, which made Maine, a free state, and Missouri, a slave state, and everything above the 36° 30 north latitude free. Other compromises such as the Compromise of 1850 did please both sides. The Compromise included admitting California as a free state and interstate slave trade to be abolished which went in favor of the North. The Compromise also went with the South when it included stricter fugitive slave laws in document 7, the Kansas Nebraska Act, made it possible for new states to decide if they were going to be free, or slave states. The North and the South were far from settling the slave issue.…

    • 661 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Better Essays

    Pre-Civil War Apush
    • 2112 Words
    • 9 Pages

    Pre-Civil War Apush

    In the 1850s, the North and South could not agree on anything and were in constant disagreements. In 1850, Henry Clay created the Compromise of 1850. In the compromise, it was said that California would be admitted as a free state which created a stir in the South since it would mean that the amount of Free states and slave states would be unbalanced (Shown in Document B). The North would now have power of the Senate and superiority over the South. The country would give Texas ten million dollars if they gave up claims to Mexico. This would take away a large piece of territory for a relatively low sum. There would be abolition of slave trade in Washington D.C., but not slavery. This meant that emancipation of slavery in the nation’s capital was starting. Also, Mexico and Utah’s slave status rested on popular sovereignty which leaned toward Free State status due to the incompatibility of the plantation system with the environment. Then, there would be a Fugitive Slave Law put in to place which would compel local officials to capture and return runaway slaves along with denying them jury trials, which some congressmen were against (Document F). Daniel Webster also delivered the Seventh of March speech backing this compromise up as everyone else did not like the idea and explained why he thought it was necessary (Document A). This caused the South distress…

    • 2112 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Better Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    sample orr and ozark mo
    • 926 Words
    • 4 Pages

    sample orr and ozark mo

    During the elections of 1860, the United States was divided by decisions concerning slavery. The Missouri territory came to the United States as part of the 1803 Louisiana Purchase. The House of Representatives put forward an amendment to the admission of Missouri that would prohibit the introduction of slaves into Missouri and freeing the children of slaves at the age of 25. The Senate passed the bill admitting Missouri without the amendment, but it was rejected by the House, pushing the controversy into 1820. The Great Compromiser, Henry Clay, proposed the following elements of a sectional compromise: That Missouri be admitted to the Union as a slave state (as the population of the territory apparently desired).That slavery was to be prohibited from the new American territories in the Louisiana Purchase north of 36/30’ north latitude (the southern boundary of Missouri). States to the south of the line (the new Arkansas Territory) would decide the slavery issue for themselves. Missouri became the 24th state on August 10, 1821. The Missouri Compromise was canceled in 1854 with the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Act.…

    • 926 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    LEading up to Civil War, North vs. South
    • 491 Words
    • 2 Pages

    LEading up to Civil War, North vs. South

    One of the major exports of the south is cotton, and while the north invested in factories and railroads, they invested in slaves to tend to their crops. The Missouri Compromise of 1820 stated that all territories about the 36’30 line must enter as free states, and all territories below must enter as slave. They also enter as pairs, one free/one slave, to keep balance. Many inventions, such as the Cotton Gin, led to an increased need for slaves. All the while, the North was moving away from slavery for both moral and economic reasons. Popular Sovereignty allowed citizens of each new territory to vote and decide if their area would be slave or free.…

    • 491 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Constitution Responsibility For Sectional Discord and Secession
    • 1492 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Constitution Responsibility For Sectional Discord and Secession

    The debate over slavery arose again after the Mexican-American War, when Congress had to decide the status of new territory acquired from Mexico. Although the Constitution gave Congress no ability to rid the nation of slavery, it allowed for Congress to determine the qualification future state's admission. This made it possible for a majority of either section to manipulate a new state's status through making the abolition or the protection of slavery necessary for the state to become organized. An earlier compromise in 1820, was the result of a struggle for sectional control over the status of Missouri. Congress choose to appease both sides by admitting Missouri as a slave state and Maine as a free state. The compromise created a westward line dividing the…

    • 1492 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Missouri Compromise Analysis
    • 820 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Missouri Compromise Analysis

    These views maintained continuity from earlier abolitionists like the Society of Friends during the Revolutionary Era. While questioning slavery, the North also took political approach. Knowing that ending slavery altogether was highly unlikely, the northern states still wanted to make sure that southern states did not outnumber them inside Congress. As people migrated into new lands that were gained from the Louisiana Territory, tensions rose higher. They were pretty high when Missouri applied for statehood as a slave state. If Missouri was allowed to enter as a slave state, then the free states would be overpowered in Congress. Maintaining a political balance of power was very important to both the North and the South as neither wanted to be subdue to the views of the other. Political actions were taken during the Missouri Compromise to ensure that slavery did not exceed the 54’ 40” line. This line was put into place to ensure that slavery did not expand northward or westward. In addition, the state of Maine was brought into play the very next year which maintained an equal number of free and slave states. The…

    • 820 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Sectional Compromises in the 19th Century
    • 1295 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Sectional Compromises in the 19th Century

    First, the Missouri Compromise of 1820 established the slavery line that allowed slavery below it and forbid slavery above it. It also gave the South another slave state in Missouri and the north a free state in Maine. Although each region gained a state in the Senate, the south benefited most from the acquisition because Missouri was in such a pivotal position in the country, right on the border. Later on with the Kansas-Nebraska Act in 1854, Missouri had a big role in getting Kansas to vote south because many proslavery Missourians crossed the border into Kansas to vote slavery. The Missouri Compromise also helped slavery because the line that was formed to limit slavery had more land below the line than above it. Therefore, slavery was given more land to be slave and therefore more power in the Senate, when the territories became state. In effect, the north got the short end of the stick and the south was given the first hint of being able to push around the north. The interesting thing is, the north agreed to all these provisions that would clearly benefit the south.…

    • 1295 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Analyze the Reasons Why Americans Could Not Compromise to Resolve Political Disputes by 1860
    • 298 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Analyze the Reasons Why Americans Could Not Compromise to Resolve Political Disputes by 1860

    During the 1800's, Americans in the North and South often had conflict but could no longer resolve their political disputes through compromise by the year 1860. In this time period, compromise was not an option because slavery and states rights' caused political disputes between the north and south.The two political parties in the north and south lost their ability to cooperate and by the mid 1800's increased the issue of the division of the states.…

    • 298 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    History 101 Assignment 1
    • 615 Words
    • 2 Pages

    History 101 Assignment 1

    In the Missouri Compromise, Missouri applied for admission to the United States in 1819. Congress did no make any provisions to not allow for slavery in the area west of the Mississippi River. The north and the south differed over no more slaves being introduced into Missouri. Majority of the north agreed to this offer although most of the south was against it. The south did not want the north to control Congress and its…

    • 615 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Better Essays

    In what ways and to what extent did constitutional and social development between 1860 and 1877 amount to a revolution?
    • 1180 Words
    • 3 Pages

    In what ways and to what extent did constitutional and social development between 1860 and 1877 amount to a revolution?

    Prior to 1860 the United States was already split into opposing sides fighting for power. Although these conflicts never reached the battlefield, the slaves states and free states were always competeing for representation in congress. Each side wanted more states for them to get more representation. To prevent too much conflict, they decided on numerous compromises such as the Missouri Compromise and the Compromise of 1850. Although these did ease tensions to some degree, they were only delaying the enedible. It started when Abraham Lincoln was voted as president. South Carolina was the leader of the southern states and began the cesession of the states. After Lincoln was inaugurated in 1860 seven states ceded from the Union and soon after four more joined them. The south believed that they had the constitutional right to cede. (Doc A) South Carolina feared that the north would gain enough power over the south that they would abolish slavery in the south. South Carolina felt that their powers were being smuthered so they had no choice but to cede from the Union. This of course was the start of a very bloody war for both the northern and souther states. This conflict led to the Emancipation Proclamation and the freeing of the slaves in the south. However this was only the beginning of the revolution which the nation was going through.…

    • 1180 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Better Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Analyze the changes that occured during the 1960s in the goals, strategies, and support of the movement for African American civil rights
    • 1134 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Analyze the changes that occured during the 1960s in the goals, strategies, and support of the movement for African American civil rights

    As the north began to grow more industrially, the south stuck to their farms that were mainly maintained by slaves. This brought up a difficult dispute with the matter of how tariffs should be handled. Since the north became industrial, it was more efficient of them to impose tariffs on the country to better their economy. Instead of the people of the north getting better deals purchasing goods from Europe, the higher tariffs made it harder and cost them more to do business with Europe, as result they purchased goods from local businesses. This proved to be a major problem for the south because the high tariffs levels threatened their cotton exports and goods imports from their main buyers and sellers, the Europeans. This angered the south because the tariffs favored the North by protecting them from foreign competition such as with the Tariff of Abominations in 1828. The tariff forced the South to buy manufactured goods from U.S. manufacturers, mainly in the North, at a higher price, while southern states also faced a reduced income from sales of raw materials. But then the tariff of 1832 was addressed by Andrew Jackson to further lower the tariffs, but the south was still. The coexistence…

    • 1134 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    In the Early Nineteenth Century Americans Sought to Resolve Their Political Disputes Through Compromise Yet by 1860 This No Longer Seemed Possible Analyze
    • 1056 Words
    • 5 Pages

    In the Early Nineteenth Century Americans Sought to Resolve Their Political Disputes Through Compromise Yet by 1860 This No Longer Seemed Possible Analyze

    As the north began to grow more industrially, the south stuck to their farms that were mainly maintained by slaves. This brought up a difficult dispute with the matter of how tariffs should be handled. Since the north became industrial, it was more efficient of them to impose tariffs on the country to better their economy. Because instead of the people of the north getting better deals purchasing goods from Europe, the higher tariffs made it harder and cost them more to do business with Europe, as result they purchased goods from local businesses. This proved to be a major problem for the south because the high tariffs levels threatened their cotton exports and goods imports from their main buyers and sellers, the Europeans. This angered the south because the tariffs favored the North by protecting them from foreign competition such as with the Tariff of Abominations, so called by the south, in 1828. The tariff forced the South to buy manufactured goods from U.S. manufacturers, mainly in the North, at a higher price, while southern states also faced a reduced income from sales of raw materials. But then the tariff of 1832 was addressed by Andrew Jackson to further lower the tariffs, but the south was still…

    • 1056 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    How Supporters of Slavery Used Legal, Religious, and Economic Arguments to Defend the Institution
    • 1531 Words
    • 5 Pages

    How Supporters of Slavery Used Legal, Religious, and Economic Arguments to Defend the Institution

    Throughout the history of the United States, there have always been conflicts between the North and the South. Basically throughout the 1900s, the North and South acted somewhat childishly towards each other about different topics. As the North became more industrialized and self sufficient, the South stayed behind and depended heavily on other countries for manufactured goods in exchange for cotton. The North felt superior to the South, and the South was not pleased about that. Although most Northerners didn 't care much for slavery, there were handfuls that were abolitionists and attacked the South on their "backwards" economy that depended on slavery . In the South, not everyone was a slaveholder as one may think; there were actually more non slaveholders than slaveholders simply because slaves were expensive "property that only the wealthier Southerners could afford. Although many Southerners didn 't own slaves, they still did not attack the institution of slavery. Why? The answer is simple, many non-slaveholders hoped to become slaveholders one day. They also accepted the racist ways on which slavery was based. Both Southern slaveholders and non-slaveholders didn 't like the idea of emancipation simply because they feared that blacks might believe themselves equal with whites and back then, that seemed ridiculous . They concluded that emancipation would cause a race war and were therefore against any sort of abolition of slavery . This is why the supporters of slavery used legal, religious, and economic-2-arguments to defend the institution, they were simply accustomed to the lifestyle slavery provided for them and they weren 't going to let it go without a fight.…

    • 1531 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More

Related Topics