Missouri compromise map
Click here to ENTER
He is considered the first hero of the American Revolution. About Arras WordPress Theme. Compromise of Heritage Society. Maps Posted in: Maps.
Controversy over enslavement continued into the s. In , the Supreme Court ruled on a landmark case, Dred Scott v. Sandford , in which enslaved African American Dred Scott sued for his freedom on the grounds that he had lived in Illinois, where enslavement was illegal.
The court ruled against Scott, declaring that any African American, enslaved or free, whose ancestors had been sold as enslaved people could not be an American citizen. Since the court ruled that Scott was not a citizen, he had no legal grounds to sue. As part of its decision, the Supreme Court also declared that the federal government had no authority to regulate enslavement in the federal territories, and ultimately, led to the finding that the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional. When you visit the site, Dotdash Meredith and its partners may store or retrieve information on your browser, mostly in the form of cookies.
Cookies collect information about your preferences and your devices and are used to make the site work as you expect it to, to understand how you interact with the site, and to show advertisements that are targeted to your interests. You can find out more about our use, change your default settings, and withdraw your consent at any time with effect for the future by visiting Cookies Settings , which can also be found in the footer of the site.
Share Flipboard Email. The Black Freedom Struggle. Early 20th Century. The Southern Civil Rights Movement. Politics and Race in Late 20th Century. Resisting Racism in Policing and the Justice System. Tragically, for a nation founded upon ideals and not mere tradition or blood, this important question would eventually be answered by war instead of words.
Explain how supporting questions contribute to an inquiry and how, through engaging source work, new compelling and supporting questions emerge. Evaluate how historical events and developments were shaped by unique circumstances of time and place as well as broader historical contexts. Analyze change and continuity in historical eras. Use questions generated about individuals and groups to assess how the significance of their actions changes over time and is shaped by the historical context.
Analyze complex and interacting factors that influenced the perspectives of people during different historical eras. Construct arguments using precise and knowledgeable claims, with evidence from multiple sources, while acknowledging counterclaims and evidentiary weaknesses.
Present adaptations of arguments and explanations that feature evocative ideas and perspectives on issues and topics to reach a range of audiences and venues outside the classroom using print and oral technologies e. To teach this lesson about the seeds of American sectionalism, four activities are provided below: two on the Missouri Compromise and two on the Nullification Crisis.
Review the activities, then locate and bookmark websites and primary documents that you will use. If your students lack experience in dealing with primary sources, you might use one or more preliminary exercises to help them develop these skills. Finally, History Matters offers a page on ” Making Sense of Maps ” which gives helpful advice to teachers in getting their students to use such sources effectively.
Access the interactive map of the Missouri Compromise of and become familiar with the location of the free states, the slave states, the regions identified as U. By clicking on each state, students can bring up statistical information about each state in the year , compiled by reference to the U. Bureau of the Census from the Department of Commerce. Students will find particularly interesting the statistics of their own state, if it existed by They will do a comparative study of regions and states by using the pop-up information.
Two worksheets with question and answer charts are provided for student use with the interactive map:. If time permits, both the economic and philosophic activities should be completed. Otherwise, choose one to show the growing sectionalism of American.
This section will help students to deepen their understanding of the basic commercial differences between the industrial North and the agricultural South. The South, especially South Carolina, was sorely aggravated by the imposition of the tariffs of and , causing them to resort to the threat of nullification and secession. In this activity, students will use internet resources from the EDSITEment-reviewed websites of American Memory and Digital History to read primary sources and analyze graphs and a map.
The video below provides a look at the issue of slavery and secession between the Revolutionary War and the American Civil War as a supplement to the primary source materials produced on competing sides of the slave and free state debate. The first fourteen minutes are recommended to provide background and context for the debates that transpired after Have the students visit the following sites, and answer the corresponding questions on pages of the PDF.
When students return with the information gained from this activity, begin a discussion about the basic differences in the commercial economies of North and South, and about how the tariffs embittered the relationship between the two regions. If students do not bring this up, point out that while the diversified manufactures of the North were occupying a greater part of the overall U.
When Congress enacted the Tariff of , which lowered the tariff but not substantially, the legislature of South Carolina responded by calling a special convention. They issued what was called the ” South Carolina Ordinance of Nullification. From there the student will take a post-it note and write down their refined and supported understandings about the Missouri Compromise: The Post-It Note Should address the following prompts:.
The issue that it addressed within the Missouri Compromise:. Different views about the Missouri Compromise:. The impact of the Missouri Compromise on the nation:.
Questioning Reflections. Have students construct responses that demonstrate their ability to grasp abstract concepts and critically analyze events and information to infer its overall impact. Reflection Statements:. How was James Tallmadge different from Henry Clay? What are the characteristics of a successful compromise?
How do you know these are needed? In what ways could we show the impact of the Missouri Compromise outside of Congress? How does the Missouri Compromise relate to the Civil War.
Map of Missouri Compromise · Young American Republic
I considered it at once as the knell of the Union. It is hushed indeed for the moment. A geographical line, coinciding with a marked principle, moral and political, once conceived and held up to the angry passions of men, will never be obliterated; and every new irritation will mark it deeper and deeper. The debate over the admission of Missouri also raised the issue of sectional balance, as the country was equally divided between slave states and free states, with eleven each. To admit Missouri as a slave state would tip the balance in the Senate, which is made up of two senators per state, in favor of the slave states.
That made northern states want Maine admitted as a free state. Maine was admitted in ,  and Missouri in ,  The trend of admitting a new free or slave state to balance the status of previous ones would continue up until The next state to be admitted would be Arkansas slave state in , quickly followed by Michigan free state in In , two slave states Texas and Florida were admitted, which was countered by the free states of Iowa and Wisconsin in and From the constitutional standpoint, the Missouri Compromise was important as the example of congressional exclusion of slavery from US territory acquired since the Northwest Ordinance.
Nevertheless, the Compromise was deeply disappointing to blacks in both the North and the South, as it stopped the Southern progression of gradual emancipation at Missouri’s southern border, and it legitimized slavery as a southern institution.
Douglas ‘s Kansas—Nebraska Act of The repeal of the Compromise caused outrage in the North and sparked the return to politics of Abraham Lincoln ,  who criticized slavery and excoriated Douglas’s act in his ” Peoria Speech ” October 16, From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. End of Atlantic slave trade Panic of Trial of Reuben Crandall Commonwealth v. Aves The Amistad affair Prigg v.
Sandford Virginia v. John Brown. Cobb of Georgia. Journal of American History. It maintained its identity in relation to the opposition by moderate and pragmatic advocacy of strict construction of the Constitution.
Because it had competition, it could maintain discipline. It responded to its constituent elements because it depended on them for support.
But eventually, its very success was its undoing. After , stirred by the nationalism of the postwar era, and with the Federals in decline, the Republicans took up Federalist positions on a number of the great public issues of the day, sweeping all before then as they did.
The Federalists gave up the ghost. In the “Era of Good Feelings” that followed, everybody began to call himself a Republican, and a new theory of party amalgamation preached the doctrine that party division was bad and that a one-party system best served the national interest. Only gradually did it become apparent that in victory, the Republican’s party had lost its identity, and its usefulness.
As the party of the whole nation, it ceased to be responsive to any particular elements in its constituency. It ceased to be responsive to the North When it did [become unresponsive], and because it did, it invited the Missouri crisis of — It ceased to be responsive to the South.
It underlay the Constitution and its creation of a government of limited powers In that sense, his worries proved to be warranted. The entire congressional debate of — over the Missouri Question turned on the question of federal versus state sovereignty, essentially a constitutional conflict in which Jefferson’s long-standing opposition to federal power was clear and unequivocal, the Louisiana Purchase being the one exception that was now coming back to haunt him. But just as the constitutional character of the congressional debate served only to mask the deeper moral and ideological issues at stake, Jefferson’s own sense of regret at his complicity in providing the constitutional precedent for the Tallmadge amendment merely scratched that surface of his despair.
National Park Service. Retrieved July 3, Several thousand planters took their slaves in the area All were in for a shock. The Tallmadge amendment of , therefore, must also be considered the first serious challenge to the extension of slavery. The year before, he had objected to the admission of Illinois on the well-founded grounds that its constitution did not provide enough assurance that the Northwest Ordinance prohibition on slavery would be perpetuated.
He was known as a political odd duck. Nominally an ally and kin, by marriage, of De Witt Clinton, who nonetheless distrusted him, Tallmadge was disliked by the surviving New York Federalists, who detested his defense of General Andrew Jackson against attacks on Jackson’s military command in East Florida.
January 23, Adirondack Almanack. Retrieved August 2, It began with congressional conflicts over slavery and related matter in the s. It reached a crisis during the first great American debate about slavery in the nineteenth century, over the admission of Missouri to the Union.
The story also offers historical paradoxes of its own, in which hardline slaveholding Southern Republicans rejected the egalitarian ideals of the slave-holder Jefferson while anti-slavery Northern Republicans upheld them—even as Jefferson himself supported slavery’s expansion on purportedly antislavery grounds.
The Jeffersonian rupture over slavery drew upon ideas from the Revolutionary era. It began with congressional conflicts over slavery and related matters in the s. It underlay the Constitution and its creation of a government of limited powers, without which Southern participation would have been unthinkable. In part, the breakthrough of emancipation in the Middle States after —especially in New York, where James Tallmadge played a direct role—emboldened Northern antislavery opinion.
Southern slavery had spread since After the end of the War of , and thanks to new demand from the Lancashire mills, the effects of Eli Whitney’s cotton gin, and the new profitability of upland cotton, slavery expanded into Alabama , Mississippi , and Louisiana. Between and , U. Slavery’s revival weakened what had been, during the Revolutionary and post-Revolutionary era, a widespread assumption in the South, although not in South Carolina and Georgia, that slavery was doomed.
By the early s, Southern liberal blandishments of the post-Revolutionary years had either fallen on the defensive or disappeared entirely. This was that the institution of slavery should not be dealt with from outside the South.
Whatever the merits of the institution—and Southerners violently disagreed about this, never more so than in the s—the presence of the slave was a fact too critical, too sensitive, too perilous to be dealt with by those not directly affected. Slavery must remain a Southern question.
Northern attacks on the institution were regarded as incitements to riot among the slave populations—deemed a dire threat to white southern security. Tallmadge’s amendments horrified Southern congressmen, the vast majority of whom were Jeffersonian Republicans.
They claimed that whatever the rights and wrongs of slavery, Congress lacked the power to interfere with its expansion. Southerners of all factions and both parties rallied to the proposition that slavery must remain a Southern question.
Because the number of presidential electors assigned to each state was equal to the size of its congressional delegation The representation of any state in the lower house of Congress was based on the number of its free inhabitants, push three-fifths of its slaves.
The free states were now  forging ahead in total population, were now had a definite majority. On the other hand, the delegation from the South was disproportionate to its free population, and the region actually had representation for its slave property. This situation vexed the Northerners, especially the New Englanders, who had suffered from political frustration since the Louisiana Purchase, and who especially resented the rule of the Virginia Dynasty.
The issue, for King, at least in his early speeches on Missouri, was not chiefly moral. King explicitly abjured wanting to benefit either slaves or free blacks. His goal, rather, was to ward off the political subjugation of the older northeastern states—and to protect what he called ‘the common defense, the general welfare, and [the] wise administration of government. Tallmadge [remarked the trans-Mississippi region] ‘had no claim to such unequal representation, unjust upon the other States.
Indeed, the congressional bulwark of what became known, rightly, as the Slave Power proved not to be the House, but the Senate, where the three-fifths rule made no difference.
The House twice passed [in the 15th Congress] by substantial margins, antislavery resolutions proposed by [Tallmadge] with the largely Northern Republican majority founding its case on Jefferson’s Declaration [of Independence] The antislavery effort would die in the Senate, where, again, the three-fifths clause made no difference. In such power calculations, the composition of the Senate was of even greater moment than that of the House So the South looked to preserve its sectional equality in the Senate.
The fact that the Founders had decided that each state, however large or small, would elect two senators meant the South’s power in the Senate was disproportionate to its population, and that maintaining a senatorial parity between North and South depended on bringing in equal numbers of free and slave states. Ammons, The main issue seemed simple enough, but the ramifications were not. Since , in a flurry of state admissions, the numbers of new slave and free states had been equal, leaving the balance of slave and free states nationwide and in the Senate equal.
The balance was deceptive. In , when Illinois gained admission to the Union, antislavery forces won a state constitution that formally barred slavery but included a fierce legal code that regulated free blacks and permitted the election of two Southern-born senators. In practical terms, were Missouri admitted as a slave state, the Southern bloc in the Senate might enjoy a four-vote, not a two-vote majority. Earlier and more passionately than the Federalists, Republicans rooted their antislavery arguments, not in political expediency, but in egalitarian morality—the belief, as Fuller declared, that it was both ‘the right and duty of Congress’ to restrict the spread ‘of the intolerable evil and the crying enormity of slavery.
If all men were created equal, as Jefferson said, then slaves, as men, were born free and, under any truly republican government, entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. As the Constitution, in Article 4, section 4, made a republican government in the states a fundamental guarantee of the Union, the extension of slavery into areas where slavery did not exist in was not only immoral but unconstitutional.
For the debate represented a violation of the sectional understanding and the vow of silence He drew his conclusion from several circumstances Holmes, who wish to detach the Maine statehood from that of Missouri] was the first to suggest that the purpose behind the movement to restrict [slavery in] Missouri was a new alignment of parties.
New York, he hinted, was the center of this conspiracy; and he barely concealed his belief that Rufus King and [Governor] De Witt Clinton—a Federalist and many believed a crypto-Federalist—were its leaders.
From then onward, the notion that a Federalist—Clintonian alliance was ‘plotting’ to build a new northern party out of the ruins of the Republican Ascendancy was never absent from the Missouri debates. In one sense the consolidations were simply the old monarchists in slightly different guise Although most Northern Federalists backed restriction, they were hardly monolithic on the issue; indeed, in the first key vote on Tallmadge’s amendments over Missouri, the proportion of Northern Republicans who backed restriction surpassed that of Northern Federalists.
They did not think in terms of a revival of Federalism, but rather of establishing a liaison with discontented Republicans which would offer them an opportunity to re-engage in political activity in some other form than a permanent minority. Federalist ‘plots’ and ‘consolidation’], Monroe and other Southerners obscured the very real weight of antislavery sentiment involved in the restrictionist movement. Millard Fillmore: The 13th President, — Henry Holt.
ISBN Encyclopedia of African American History. Library of Congress. April 22, Retrieved November 18, March 15, August 10, Retrieved August 24, Brown, Richard H. Brown, Richard Holbrook , The Missouri compromise: political statesmanship or unwise evasion? Archibald The true history of the Missouri compromise and its repeal. The Robert Clarke Company. Forbes, Robert Pierce University of North Carolina Press.
Gilman, D. New International Encyclopedia 1st ed. New York: Dodd, Mead. Heman The Missouri Compromise. The Jefferson Image in the American Mind. University of Virginia Press. Martin’s, pp. Wikisource has original text related to this article: Missouri Compromise.
James Monroe. Virginia Ratifying Convention Founding Fathers. Senate elections Governor of Virginia election, U. Monroe on slavery American Colonization Society Virginia dynasty. Gouverneur son-in-law. Missouri in the American Civil War. Confederacy Union.
Shelby’s Raid Price’s Missouri Expedition. Involvement by city or town. Centralia Osceola St. John S. Marmaduke Sterling Price Joseph O.
Samuel R. Curtis Thomas Ewing Jr. Nathaniel Lyon. Confederate Home. General Order 11 Bleeding Kansas. Category Commons. American Civil War. Abolitionism in the United States Susan B. Anthony James G. Combatants Theaters Campaigns Battles States. Army Navy Marine Corps. Involvement by state or territory.
Involvement cities. Johnston J. Smith Stuart Taylor Wheeler. Reconstruction Amendments 13th Amendment 14th Amendment 15th Amendment. Lee List of memorials to Jefferson Davis. Memorial Day U. Related topics. Balloon Corps U. Home Guard U. Military Railroad. Presidential Election of War Democrats.
Sanitary Commission Women soldiers. Category Portal. Authority control National Archives US. Hidden categories: CS1: Julian—Gregorian uncertainty Articles with short description Short description is different from Wikidata Use mdy dates from April Wikipedia articles needing clarification from June All articles with failed verification Articles with failed verification from January Wikipedia articles incorporating a citation from the New International Encyclopedia Articles with NARA identifiers.
Geography, Social Studies. The audio, illustrations, photos, and videos are credited beneath the media asset, except for promotional images, which generally link to another page that contains the media credit. The Rights Holder for media is the person or group credited. For information on user permissions, please read our Terms of Service. If you have questions about licensing content on this page, please contact ngimagecollection natgeo. If you have questions about how to cite anything on our website in your project or classroom presentation, please contact your teacher.
She or he will best know the preferred format. When you reach out to him or her, you will need the page title, URL, and the date you accessed the resource. If a media asset is downloadable, a download button appears in the corner of the media viewer. If no button appears, you cannot download or save the media.
Text on this page is printable and can be used according to our Terms of Service. Any interactives on this page can only be played while you are visiting our website.