Essay On Missouri Compromise

The precedents that Washington set were the greatest of all, but the best examples he mentioned were critical to America. Washington was the first president of the United States. He had served two terms, and warned future presidents not to run for a third term. He believed it would make citizens believe that the government is in power; but truly, the states and people are in control. Based on George Washington’s observations, he warned the people to stay united, stay neutral, and follow the constitution, in order to keep the U.S. stable.

So, this essay will explain one from the other. The Missouri Compromise has many differences from the Compromise of 1850. One difference would be that in breaking up the different parts of the Louisiana Territory, it created peace between Northerners and Southerners. The Northerners were happy that more territory was safe for freed slaves, although they weren't quite happy that there was still slavery in the USA. However, the southerners stayed happy until the Southerners realized that this gave congress a say in which states could have slavery.

missouri as a slave or free state would majorly disrupt the balance of the U.S.'s free vs. slave areas (surfacing debate over if slavery should be permitted at all in America). The compromise prevented any further expansion of pro-slave territories as well as fortified the Fugitive Slave Law. The forced the non-slaveowners tp participate in slavery.

Although most of the plans Congress has come up with are good, all plans have cons, even congress 's. Since the right to vote was given to the freedmen and made them citizens they are going to be treated equally. The Southerners very recently considered the freedmen as their slaves and won 't like the idea of them be equals. The southern states get to keep their property but they have to pay for the damages. They are losing

Distinguished members of Congress, we the United States of America, have fought two years of this war, costly in both currency and lives, against a group of rebels, who against the Constitution seceded and formed the so-called “Confederate States of America,” but for what purpose are we fighting? We fight to end the brutal institution of slavery, to uphold our constitution and moreover to uphold this glorious union of all American states. How, you may ask, do we create a nation composed of persons of many different beliefs? We must firstly handle the issue of those engaged in the creation and protection of those treasonous states, next is the issue of use of the land of the rebel states, and finally we shall discuss the fractious issue of

The plan proposed by Virginia otherwise known as the “large-state plan.” Which proposed “a bicameral legislature, in which the lower house would be elected proportionately and the upper house would be selected from a list of nominees sent from the state legislatures on the basis of equal representation for the states. ”(add footnote) As the smaller states feared that this plan would lose a voice in the federal government if they continued with the Virginia plan, they opposed this plan and came up with one for themselves which would be known as the “small-state plan.” The small-state plan would propose “a unicameral Congress, with equal representation for each state, with all the powers of the Confederation Congress.

This way, the North controls the government and laws about equality. President Jackson doesn’t think this should be the case, but if Southern rebels are let into government then we will never reach

While many delegates argued that slaves were property, and not people, neither the North or South fully accomplished their goals, as slaves were counted minorly towards population. However, the provisions still prohibited slaves from voting, which was still considered a “win” for the state of New

Obviously, smaller states were not pleased with that plan. They thought that larger states could easily overrule them in congress. So William Paterson created a plan called the New Jersey Plan. It as well had the same three branches but, the plan provided legislators to have only one house. Each state would only one vote in the legislator, regardless of the population.

As the tensions between the North and the South keep growing, we have to look at the secession of the Southern states and if this act will help or hinder the debate brought about between the two territories. One of the first things we need to inspect is the differences between the two. Then we need to get down to the core and see why there are major issues between the North and the South. Finally, after we go through the facts, I will present my opinion on whether or not secession is necessary and if it is or isn’t the right route to take in order to resolve the conflicts separating the United States.

Since the end of the American Civil War, Federalism has been a very important idea in the United States. Federalism has appeared in many instances within different governmental ideas. The original idea of Federalism gave up states’ rights and handed them to the government to create a more centralized federal system. Over time Federalism has had many views by different leaders in our government. These viewpoints began with Ronald Reagan’s idea of “New-Federalism,” and carried on throughout time involving the Violence Against Women Act and more recently the urge to modify the Affordable Care Act.

The Missouri Compromise of 1820 was an attempt by Congress to ease some of the political rivalries between the North and the South (history.com 2009). The compromise stated the fact that all states up north would not have slavery and all states south would allow and continue the act of slavery (history.com 2009). It went both ways since it split the country up evenly between slave and free. The Missouri Compromise of 1820 was handwritten by Henry Clay in 1820 (ancestralfindings.com 1995). On March 6th of 1820, President James Monroe signed the Missouri Compromise and made it the new law of the land (loc.gov 2017).

The larger states, in favor of the Virginia Plan, were unsure of whether or not slaves were to be counted as part of the population or not. The Southern states wanted slaves to be counted as part of the population, but to also be considered as property, in case the new government was to levy taxes on each state on the basis of population. They also believed that even if slaves were to be counted as people, they still would not be granted citizenship or have the right to vote. Because the majority of the North did not have slaves, the South was in favor of having

The issue the compromise was about was whether there should be slavery in the western territories. Maine wanted to be added to the Union, however, slavery was banned there. If Maine were to be added to the Union, it would upset the balance between free and slave states in the nation and the Senate. So, the Missouri Compromise, proposed by Senator Henry Clay, allowed Maine to enter the Union as a free state, and allowed Missouri to be entered into the Union as a slave state.

Will we use the situation as a catalyst that serves to strengthen