The Trials of Enslavement and the Compromise of 1850

Please note! This essay has been submitted by a student.

The trials of enslavement pertained to numerous economic difficulties for all communities in the country as well as for foreign countries worldwide. This major guide required slavery to allow the country to fall into an abyss thus separating the country, to graduate to a civil war. The confliction between the free states and slave states is a growing argument that is ignored for 30 years after a movement is pushed upon the government. Which is most commonly known as the compromise of 1850 or also known as the fugitive slave act which overall didn’t accomplish much but left the dispute of slave territories unsettled. The south representation routed for a voting act to decide the fate of slavery, the north took a different direction towards slavery rather than to just abolish it altogether. The different views are what controls how the confederate and union are going to react to each significant event. The active laws and political change about the trials of enslavement, during this period, is what leads to the division of the nation.

Essay due? We'll write it for you!

Any subject

Min. 3-hour delivery

Pay if satisfied

Get your price

Stephen A. Douglas is a former U.S. senator representative for Illinois for two terms with an outstanding track record. Douglas broke the compromise of 1850 into smaller fragments to get the compromise passed through the Senate, as well as putting an end to the Missouri Compromise. Douglas taking responsibility for the Kansas and Nebraska act. Abraham Lincoln was the 16th president but before Abraham was a one-year term senator whig and an American politician. The Lincoln-Douglas debates are a significant event for the fate of the national cause of each candidate’s views on slavery but both trying to settle slavery to come to one end solution.

Douglas sought out to use popular sovereignty as the citizens of each state would determine the present condition of slavery’s position in the slave or free state. as the solution but as Abraham knew he ….. Abraham lincoln’s view in the debate intended not to extend but progress in the abolishment of slavery although Lincoln’s solutions were reasonable and not mostly eradicating an activity such as slavery. For instance “Lincoln was not an abolitionist, but, he despised slavery and he envisioned a time in the future when slavery would disappear and he believed it should be forbidden from being established in any new state that joined the Union.’’(“The Lincoln-Douglas debates”). Each candidate’s views were prominently formidable to the other common problem as tension rises on both sides of the country. “The nation’s political leaders had attempted for decades to deal with the issue of human bondage employing various compromises, but between the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Act in 1854 and the debates, differences between Northerners and Southerners over slavery reached the boiling point’’(Muelder).

Immediately after the original 13 colonies declared their independence from the United Kingdom in 1776, they announced themselves as an independent (sovereign) state. For the starting colonies, a strong central government is needed but not found until 1787 the constitution was established setting a strong government. State’s rights were abused, used, and exceeded from states who believe how slavery should work rather than following the federal government laws set for slavery. For instance, “Some Northerners aided the escape of runaway slaves (a violation of the Constitution’s provisions that made a fugitive from one state a fugitive in every state) and mobs sometimes assaulted slave owners and slave hunters seeking runaways.”(States rights”). Northern states executing and allowing runaway slaves to stay, as well to care for them is going directly in opposition to the constitutional provisions. It was important for the disputes to be settled in a manner of respect but once provisions are crossed the south finds a way to retaliate. For instance “the question of whether or not to permit slavery in the new territories. The debate over slavery intensified, creating a widening gap between slaveholding and nonslaveholding states. When a “purely regional party,” The addition of territories gained from the Mexican War (1846-1848) is crucial once the balance of power is tipped on one side which is precisely what happens in favor of the north, and the south sees this as an abuse of power. For example “ In 1832 national tariffs that benefited Northern manufacturers while hurting the economy of Southern states led to the Nullification Crisis,” (“States Rights”). As this takes place, South Carolina set forth the tariffs null and void. The southern states perceived the taxing pointless, and selfish on the northern part. As these events proceed with south carolina state rights changes the vantage point of slavery. For instance ”seven states left the Union, formed a new government, and took over federal property; eight slaveholding states precariously walked a tightrope between Union and secession;” (“Dilemmas of Compromise”). This is an important time for the union cause this going to affect how they attempt to take back federal property which directly falls into the battle of Fort Sumter. The part that state rights played in the civil war is especially essential to establish the tension in act laws that were betrayed and ignored to the group’s own beliefs.

The Missouri compromise was passed into law in 1820, and written by henry clay it managed slavery in the western states, although the compromise was passed 4 decades before the civil war it is a significant event for the division of the nation. For instance “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.”(“Missouri compromise”). The Missouri compromise was an effort to keep the peace upon the northern and southern states, but in turn, only postponed the U.S. civil war. The dispute between slave states and free states is an inevitable event that was going to take place. For example “ 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 compromise”). logically the slave states have a rational place to be in fear of their position upon power if congressional representation aids the argument for free states. Northern states conversely undergo the same vantage point for the concern of power in being outnumbered in Congressional representation. For instance “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.”(“Missouri compromise”). With one state joining the union, the compromise entitled the state to each slave to count three-fifths of a person. The compromise had presented the south with an advantage to congressional power. As tension upon the free and slave states rises the northern states are growing fear of the expansion of slavery, Henry Clay suggested that if Missouri is admitted into the union so should Maine, and admit states in pairs one free and slave. For example “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,’’(“Missouri compromise”). Finalizing the compromise agreed in applying the parallel thirty-six degrees, thirty minutes north latitude. Therefore keeping the division undisturbed, until california tries to be admitted. For instance “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”(“Missouri compromise” ). The Fugitive Slave Act required all states to enforce all citizens to return runaway slaves to their masters or local authority. This law is set in place to balance the powers for the slave states however the dispute still doesn’t settle. For instance “The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 repealed the 36-30 dividing line for slavery in the Louisiana Purchase area.”(“Missouri compromise”). Concluding the compromise it settles on the thirty-six, thirty-minute line to separate slavery.

Get quality help now


Verified writer

Proficient in: History of The United States, Historical Figures, Contemporary History

4.9 (455 reviews)
“He was an absolute wonderful writer and had a great amount of patience with me as well as following all directions very accordingly. ”

+75 relevant experts are online

More Essay Samples on Topic

banner clock
Clock is ticking and inspiration doesn't come?
We`ll do boring work for you. No plagiarism guarantee. Deadline from 3 hours.

We use cookies to offer you the best experience. By continuing, we’ll assume you agree with our Cookies policy.