Compromise of 1850

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.

This led to conflict after the Mexican War in which America gained new territories in the West. This aborted the Missouri Compromise which was probably the most promising compared to the Compromise of 1850. Had the compromise been applied to all American lands then perhaps it could have succeeded. Instead, the Missouri Compromise failed and only led to further conflict between the north and south in the future. Maine became a state in 1820 and Missouri followed the next year in 1821 (PP). For the next 15 years no states entered the Union (RN). From 1836 to 1850 six states were admitted: Arkansas (1836) as a slave state, Michigan (1837) as a free state, Florida (1845) as a slave state, Texas as a slave state in1845 slave, Iowa in 1846 as a free state and Wisconsin in 1848 as a free state (RN). Nevertheless, the Compromise of 1820 lasted for over thirty years until the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 determined that new states north of the boundary deserved to be able to exercise their sovereignty in favor of slavery if they so choose (RN). Once more, in 1849, the Union was facing the same crises it had faced in 1820. In January of 1848, gold was discovered at Sutter’s Mill, which is now in present-day California (LN). From 1848

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

The westward expansion of slavery was one of the most dynamic economic and social processes going on in this country. The Industrial Revolution had changed every aspect of American life and the country’s borders spread westward with the addition of the Mexican Cession—opening new cotton fields. To maintain the original Constitutional balance of lawmaking power, Congress continued to play the compromise game in 1820 and 1850 to maintain an equal number of free and slave votes in the Senate (where every state had two votes).

All of this new land was a major benefactor to the Market Revolution and widespread commerce, but it left a lot of problems regarding slavery. Thus, The Compromise of 1850 was passed. This act admitted California as a free state and abolished slave trade in the nation’s capital to please northerners. It also Installed the Fugitive Slave Act and formed a territorial government in the west with no slavery restrictions for southerners. This compromise was also referred to as the “Armistice of 1850” because it resolved issues for at least a little bit.

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..

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

“I know no South, no North, no East, no West, to which I owe any allegiance, The Union, sir, is my country” - Henry Clay (United States History). The Compromise of 1850 was once considered despising, loathing, and abhorring. This would become altered, as it would turn out to be one of the greatest compromises in the United States and would make its mark in history. The Compromise of 1850 adopted the Fugitive Slave Act and the reason for California statehood. The compromise attempted to avoid a crisis between the North and the South, with the assistance of Henry Clay and his colleagues. The document came to be with three main ideas: significance, conflict, and compromise. The Compromise of 1850, proposed by Henry Clay, dealt with disputes

On January 29th, 1850 Senator Henry Clay Set forth a series of Conflicts in an attempt to seek a compromise and to turn away from a crisis between the Union (North)and the Confederate(south) The United States had recently Received a large territory from the result of its war with Mexico.The question that was asked about the land was Should the territory sanctions slavery, or should it be declared free? Or maybe the incipient people should be sanctioned to optate for themselves? California a territory that had grown rapidly with the gold rush of 1849, had recently petitioned Congress to enter the Cumulation as a free state. Should this be sanctioned? Ever since the Missouri Compromise, the balance between slave states and free states had been maintained; any proposal that threatened this

After the annexation of Texas and the Mexican American war, controversy over slavery had once again arose to a national level. The vast territory that the United States had acquired raised questions such as, should the territory allow slavery or should it be proclaimed as a free one? Or should the inhabitants be able to choose for themselves? The sectional unity in slave states and in free states were threated especially when California petitioned the congress to enter the union as a free slave challenging the balance of slave and free states organized by the Missouri Compromise.

“Organized and championed by Henry Clay, the Compromise of 1850 was a series of laws and policy enactments that formed a comprehensive new national policy toward issues of slavery and westward expansion. At the core of this debate was the question of whether or not frontier territories should join the Union as new slave states. Southern states preferred an expansion of slavery into new territories, whereas northern states argued in favor of abolishing slavery in any new states. The Compromise of 1850 determined that new states would be slave-free, and the slave trade was also abolished in Washington, D.C. In exchange for these concessions, southern states received an amendment to the Fugitive Slave Act, which forced northern states to take more aggressive measures to return escaped slaves into the southern states from which they departed.

As the idea of Manifest Destiny spread the country westward and new states joined the union, the disagreement over slavery became more and more heated. With each new state, came new congressman, new lawmakers. Northern states, free states, wanted the new states to have no slavery. The Southern states, pro-slavery states, wanted to extend slavery into the new states.

Zachary Taylor’s decision to slice out two huge territories in the Far West and to admit them in the union as Free states caused The Compromise of 1850 to be written. Henry Clay drafted the compromise, which included eight parts. "The first pair would admit California as a State and organize the remainder of the Mexican cession without "any restriction or condition on the subject of slavery". The second pair of resolutions settled the boundary dispute between Texas and New Mexico in favor of the last and compensated Texas by federal notion of debts brought forth during its existence as an Independent Republic. Clay 's third pair of resolutions called for abolition of the slave trade in the District of Columbia but a surety of slavery itself in the District.

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.

As America began to expand, first with the lands gained from the Louisiana Purchase and later with the Mexican War, the question of whether new states admitted to the union would be slave or free. The Missouri Compromise passed in 1820 made a rule that prohibited slavery in states from the former Louisiana Purchase the latitude 36 degrees 30 minutes north except in Missouri. During the Mexican War, conflict started about what would happen with the new territories that the US expected to gain upon victory. David Wilmot proposed the Wilmot Proviso in 1846 which would ban slavery in the new lands. However, this was shot down to much debate. The Compromise of 1850 was created by Henry Clay and others to deal with the balance between slave and free states, northern and southern interests. One of the provisions was the fugitive slave act that was discussed in number one above. Another issue that further increased tensions was the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854. It created two new territories that would allow the states to use popular sovereignty to determine whether they would be free or slave. The real issue occurred in Kansas where proslavery Missourians