Pros And Cons Of The Compromise Of 1850

1181 Words5 Pages
There were many attempts at reducing sectional tension between the Northern and Southern states prior to the Civil War through Compromises. In addition, increased political influence from changing political party platforms resulted with many attempts to gain support from the union as an entirety through political compromise. Many political compromises were ineffective at the reduction of sectional tensions in the period of 1820 to 1860 due to the entrenched positions of political parties in government not willing to allow the concessions of their political opposition to coexist. The Missouri Comprise was a temporary solution to an unsolvable dilemma. In the midst of the high-tension sectionalism debate, the Missouri territory applied for…show more content…
The Compromise of 1850 was an effort of the aging Henry Clay to place a temporary tranquility within the United States, in which results in the proposal a many combined legislative efforts. The Bill included the admission of California as a free state, the freedom for the newly attained Mexican session to choose its sovereignty without restrictions on slavery, the yielding of the New Mexican border, the abolition of the slave trade in Washington DC, and a stricter and greatly enforced Fugitive Slave Law. This attempt to unite the country through Compromise it actually broadened the sectionalism between political parties to a greater extent. Although there were both pros and cons for both parties in this bill, the idea of temporary compromise fails yet again, and is portrayed through the rejection of this compromise in government. Also, the clear divide is depicted through the strong willed actions that occur within political parties such the radicality of abolitionist movements within the Republican/ Free Soil Party and also untouchable persona that the southern planter class depict themselves as. In addition, in the duration of the 1858 election, the party platforms were swayed from those of strong opinions to ones of neutrality, to act as an almost security blanket for the deterioration of the country as a whole. This compromise was almost too broad, and with both…show more content…
Crittenden’s Compromise was a series of legislative proposals that would ensure the greater leniency for the issue of slavery for the South. Within this Compromise, it was proposed for a strengthened fugitive slave law through the country and with this it deems laws null and void and will have the power to enforce. In addition, those who violate these laws, if inputted, would be prosecuted. But the large of Crittenden’s plan was to reestablish the Missouri Compromise line across all existing and future territories of the United States, with the same regulation of northern states retaining free soil, and southern states allowing for slavery. In congress, southerners were quite pleased and accepting to the bill, but throughout the Republican Party there was little to no support for the bill, resulting in the failure for this compromise to pass. At the height of these sectional tensions, there was one final attempt to satisfy the south. The true divide and lack of benefits for the Republican Party also resulted in a failure. In addition, the proposal for such a radical bill in all actuality increased the tension between the north and the south politically once again. Within the republican majority senate, the south is attempting to present their unjust wants and desires that they know will fail to pass in congress. This was an attempt that countered all republican fundamentals, and just

    More about Pros And Cons Of The Compromise Of 1850

      Open Document