As America stretched further west, and new inventions made travel more efficient, a new problem arose: Would new territories have slaves or not? Southerners of course wanted to expand slavery into new territories in order to spread their influence and maintain their economic system. Conversely, Northerners were beginning to abolish slavery (little by little) and they also did not rely on slave labor to progress their manufacturing economy (remember...they used girls and immigrant). They feared more slave states would dominate the country, thus they would lose influence in Congress and national elections.
In 1819 America had 22 states: 11 free and 11 slave. When Missouri applied for statehood, the balance would have been thrown off making it 11 free and 12 slave. This would have given slave states more power in the Senate which scared the North. Northerners, who controlled the House of Representatives, wanted to block Missouri's admittance. So, thanks to Henry Clay the Missouri Compromise was reached.
Visit this website, this website and this website to learn more about this compromise. For the comment section consider the following questions: What were the pros and cons of this compromise? How did it lead to more conflict decades later? If you were in charge of settling this issue, what would you have done?
The problem, I think, with the Missouri Compromise was that other that it completely divided our country was that both north US and south US were offended that the other one did or did not have slavery. I don’t even understand what the big thing about keeping it completely balanced was anyway. Honestly, if you just have this one awkward state that causes a little bit of a shift I think it will be ok. I think that a better way to solve the problem would have been to let the people who were currently living in Missouri to vote on what they wanted the state to be I think that because 1) we’re a democracy; we do the whole ‘voting’ thing and 2) they were gonna be the ones living there and dealing with it anyway, so shouldn’t they get a say in it?145
ReplyDeletePro- We got 2 new states!
ReplyDeleteCon- The north and the south were still mad at eachother
Pro- We were semi-ending slavery!
Con- We completely divided our country, leading to a civil war....
The Missouri Compromise led to conflict decades later because it completely divided our country! We might as well have just said "Hey guys, I think we should make everyone mad at eachother and start a war..." They literally drew a line. A LINE!! What else is there to say? Other then "I wish we had a time machine," nothing.
I have no clue what I would have done if I were in charge of this. I wouldn't want to upset the north or the south but there's really no way to get around it. You've gotta upset somebody. If we did have a time machine, we should probably send Mr. Haston... not me. (136)
Pros: the country grew because they got two more states, the balance between slave and free states stayed equal, and it kept the country together for a little while.
ReplyDeleteCons: the southern and northern states were forming and growing against each other because of slavery, this compromise didn’t stop slavery, and it didn’t hold the country together long enough.
The compromise obviously helped to start the civil war, because it drew a line across our country and it was the top against the bottom. The north hated the south because they had slaves, and the south hated the north because they didn’t have slaves.
I have no idea what I would’ve done if I were in charge. Henry Clay was a good guy to make this compromise, but I wouldn’t want to be the one who literally split our country in half. (142)
Pros:
ReplyDelete=More land- 2 new states!
=A definition of where slavery begins and ends
Cons:
=Stirring pot for the future Civil War (I hate that name. No war- especially not that one- can be civil.)
=A definition of where slavery begins and ends
Notice how “A definition of where slavery begins and ends,” is in both? I did that that because it really depends on who it is looking at the line. If you were a slave or a free black, you’d obviously want to go north, since that’s were you can truly be free. If you were a plantation owner, you’d stay in the South because you have slaves do there. If you were someone against slavery, you’d stay up in the North because you can protest it freely and openly.
If I could have settled this, there would be no line. A LINE! The ignorance! It’s literally dividing our country with a straight line... of all things, they pick a straight line. It’s like deciding to put everything in place for prejudice and conflict.
The idea to keep balance was a good one. The way they did it was stupid. The compromise did little for us. We got two new states, which is pretty cool. But it totally tore our country in half. It was already bad enough and then they draw a line across the country to make it even worse. This line pretty much started the Civil War. The North vs. the South. Luckily, good ole Abe saved the day when he became president. That’s another story though.
ReplyDeleteIf I were in charge of the issue, I would screw it up! I mean, I definitely would have been against the line that divided the country but I do not know what I would do. I would be against slavery and maybe just try to get rid of every slave state. I don’t know though…. I was not currently living at the time. (151)
I think the Missouri compromise was a bad idea because it divided the country in half. It drew a line through the middle of the country and was setting the country up 4 conflicts later. I believe that because of this compromise we set ourselves up for the Civil War. I think Missouri should have had the right choose for themselves if they wanted slavery or not. There were some good things because they tried to keep the country equal. The bad part was that it divided our country and set us up for many conflicts and arguments about slavery.
ReplyDeleteThe Missouri Compromise made may different things happen in history. There were both some pros and cons. To start the pros were that we gained to new states from Missouri wanting statehood. Another pro is that slavery went down for a while until the invention of the cotton gin in 1793.
ReplyDeleteThen there were some cons to the compromise. The compromise made more and more tension between the North and the South.
I also thought that the whole thing is really dumb because the line was at 36°30′, but Missouri and many of the other slave states were above the line.
(101)
The Missouri compromise had its up and downs. Let's start when the cons, one thing was the idea of splitting the country in two, north and south. Which will make us of a war later on, the civil war. This also is the period were slavery gets harder in the south but no slaves in the north.
ReplyDeleteNow for pros one was the new land. Out of the compromise we got two new states! An other is the harder slavery and no slaves.
If I would have settled this I don't think I would have drawn a line across the middle of country I think every state should be free. (108)
The compromise only had one pro and one con. The pro was that it granted Missouri statehood. The con was that by dividing the country in half it started a civil war that was awful for the country and drained our economy. Without this compromise not only would there not have been a civil war but other states could have had more land to expand and grow their population without Missouri being in the way. Finally, if I was in charge of this issue I would have just left it alone and not given Missouri statehood.Thus making me a genius and the savior of our country and all its problems! (111)
ReplyDeletePros: two more states, slavery states equal to non-slavery states , country together for ehh a little while. Cons:equal amount of slavery states to non-slavery states, starting the civil war, and it drew a line over our country, north and south. all of this in the Missouri compromise tore our country apart. Giving Missouri statehood in the upper part of this line was not a good idea. Our country hated each other basically and still did not end slavery. ending slavery would have been great. but sadly it didn't it made everything worse in America. Like I mentioned before the line across America made things a lot worse than we think now. looking at this later it looks like we wanted this to happen sadly. (125)
ReplyDeleteI think that the problem with the Missouri compromise was that it completely divided our country. One good thing was that we started to end slavery. But yet another con was that the north and the south were still divided and still mad at each other. I think that the idea to keep balance was good, but they way that they tried to maintain it was not, but we did get two new states. I mean splitting the country in half, use common since. There was bound to be a war. And of course there was the civil war! Another pro is that the slave rate went down. Then the cotton gin was invented in 1793 and it went up again.(121)
ReplyDeleteactual concept of the compromise was not a bad idea. I mean, they were trying to reach and agree on something. But obviously, they can't please everyone. The best thing about it was that they tried their best to remain fair. This was very important because people were upset easily. The biggest con to it was that the South was gaining a little bit more control, and everyone was power-paranoid. Especially coming from England. This conflict would separate the country and lead to the next war. If I was in charge, I would have made all states free from slavery. (102)
ReplyDelete*The
ReplyDeleteThe PRO’s: Our nation gained two states: Missouri (a slave state) and Maine (a free state). This kept a balance of power in the Senate of slave vs. free states, southern vs. northern states.
ReplyDeleteThe CON’s: It kept the nation divided. Congress was still divided and there was a continuous power struggle, North against South.
The compromise only avoided facing the slavery problem. The Act of 1854 let Kansas and Nebraska choose whether they wanted slavery even though they were north of the compromise line. After that the Missouri Compromise was declared unconstitutional. All this set the stage for the Civil War.
If it were my job to settle this issue, I would hope that as a Southerner my political party would be for helping the South build its economy without slave labor. I hope I could convey a more sympathetic view to the needs of the African-American citizens. (149)