The Compromise of 1850 (article) | Khan Academy (2024)
The Compromise of 1850 acted as a band-aid over the growing wound of sectional divide.
Want to join the conversation?
Log in
Raen V
6 years agoPosted 6 years ago. Direct link to Raen V's post “"Anti-slavery advocates d...”
"Anti-slavery advocates did not want to abolish slavery where it already existed; rather, they wanted to keep slavery out of the western territories for the benefit of white laborers settling in the area. Abolitionists, however, thought disallowing slavery’s expansion was key to slavery eventually becoming abolished"
So do the anti-slavery advocates and abolitionists have different beliefs?
•
(21 votes)
HollieBeth
6 years agoPosted 6 years ago. Direct link to HollieBeth's post “Yes. Abolitionists believ...”
Yes. Abolitionists believed all people were equal, therefore everyone has equal rights and people of all colors can own property, vote, worship, attend school, etc. Anti-slavery advocates were opposed to slavery for other reasons (often having to due with politics or economics) but they didn’t necessarily believe freed slaves should be allowed to have the same rights as them.
(21 votes)
Mike Graf
4 years agoPosted 4 years ago. Direct link to Mike Graf's post “One could say the aboliti...”
One could say the abolitionists got a better deal because despite the law demanding return of fugitive slaves, laws are only as real as practiced. Many laws, even today, are toothless because the proximal populace does not want them enforced. Does anyone know how this Fugitive Slave Law actually played out in practice?
•
(9 votes)
David Alexander
4 years agoPosted 4 years ago. Direct link to David Alexander's post “This is cogent. The one ...”
This is cogent. The one side got "the law", while the other side was not under compulsion to enforce it unless a case was brought to court.
5 years agoPosted 5 years ago. Direct link to jada.polk's post “who do u think got the be...”
who do u think got the better deal in the compromise of 185o
•
(7 votes)
Alex
5 years agoPosted 5 years ago. Direct link to Alex's post “The North; the South's on...”
The North; the South's only concession of value that it received was the Fugitive Slave Law (which was also nullified or resisted by the North). Ultimately it wasn't about who got the "better deal", it's about the growing intensity of tension and animosity between the two sides.
(16 votes)
Nadia Vasco
5 years agoPosted 5 years ago. Direct link to Nadia Vasco's post “How was the Compromise of...”
How was the Compromise of 1850 a cause of the Civil War?
•
(10 votes)
sfor0041
5 months agoPosted 5 months ago. Direct link to sfor0041's post “The four main changes in ...”
The four main changes in the Compromise of 1850 caused tensions to build up before the civil war. The south already believed that a slave economy would benefit the nation as a whole and were constantly ready to defend against any anti-slavery institutions put in place. Also, having California as a free state and popular sovereignty for Utah and New Mexico serves as a threat to how the south makes their living because free states would have more power in congress, making slavery more likely to be abolished. These tensions would be offset in 1860, the time of Abraham Lincoln's (who is against slavery) presidency.
This is 5 years late but hopefully it helps the next reader :)
(4 votes)
olivia.smith
4 years agoPosted 4 years ago. Direct link to olivia.smith's post “"Taylor then became sudde...”
"Taylor then became suddenly ill and died within five days." Just out of curiousity, does anyone know what illness killed Taylor? I find it odd that he suddenly died, especially when his "inability to cooperate stalled the government’s resolutions on slavery."
•
(7 votes)
Hecretary Bird
4 years agoPosted 4 years ago. Direct link to Hecretary Bird's post “You're right, it definite...”
You're right, it definitely seems strange. Over the years, there have been several theories that Taylor's death was an assassination instead of just a gastrointestinal disease. Nobody knows what killed Zachary Taylor for sure, but it's most commonly believed that it was some sort of diarrhoea or G.I. disease
(3 votes)
Isaac D. Cohen
6 years agoPosted 6 years ago. Direct link to Isaac D. Cohen's post “In paragraph 4 (counting ...”
In paragraph 4 (counting the overview) mention is made of "Anti Slavery Advocates". What did these people believe? And how did their position differ from pro slavery advocates or abolitionists?
•
(4 votes)
Scout Finch
6 years agoPosted 6 years ago. Direct link to Scout Finch's post “Hello!Anti-Slavery Advoc...”
Hello! Anti-Slavery Advocates just wanted slavery to stay where it was and not spread anymore. Abolitionists wanted all slaves emancipated immediately.
(7 votes)
chastity elder
5 years agoPosted 5 years ago. Direct link to chastity elder's post “how did this cause the ci...”
how did this cause the civil war?
•
(5 votes)
angel
3 years agoPosted 3 years ago. Direct link to angel's post “why were they in slavery ...”
why were they in slavery that is for the Mexican american war
•
(3 votes)
Austin
3 years agoPosted 3 years ago. Direct link to Austin's post “At that point in U.S Hist...”
At that point in U.S History, slavery was still thriving in the southern states of the U.S. This means there were still slaves in almost all southern states and some northern ones too. The Civil War had not taken place yet, even though the Compromise was one source of tension on the topic of slaves that lead to the most of the South seceding from the Union. Slavery, even though opposed by most in the North, had not been abolished yet. The Mexican-American War and the land gained by the war just added to the growing issue of slavery and if it should be allowed.
(5 votes)
Valenzuela, Francisco
4 years agoPosted 4 years ago. Direct link to Valenzuela, Francisco's post “How did the Compromise of...”
How did the Compromise of 1850 amplify the threat of disunion?
•
(5 votes)
ckoosa25
a year agoPosted a year ago. Direct link to ckoosa25's post “The Compromise of 1850 pa...”
The Compromise of 1850 pacified the nation for only a short time. In the end, neither the North nor the South was truly happy with the agreement, and both sides grew increasingly agitated and bitter about the state of affairs.
(1 vote)
Sarah Marcotte
8 years agoPosted 8 years ago. Direct link to Sarah Marcotte's post “One part of the Missouri ...”
One part of the Missouri Compromise was to limit slavery's expansion in the country by constricting it to the southern half of the country. When Congress allowed for states to use popular sovereignty to decide if it were a slave state or not, did that nullify that part of the Missouri Compromise?
•
(5 votes)
Harriet Buchanan
7 years agoPosted 7 years ago. Direct link to Harriet Buchanan's post “Only if more states decid...”
Only if more states decided to be one way or the other.
Under the Compromise, California was admitted to the Union as a free state
free state
In the United States before 1865, a slave state was a state in which slavery and the internal or domestic slave trade were legal, while a free state was one in which they were prohibited.
https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Slave_states_and_free_states
; the slave trade was outlawed in Washington, D.C., a strict new Fugitive Slave Act compelled citizens of free states to assist in capturing enslaved people; and the new territories of Utah and New Mexico would permit white residents to decide ...
The acts called for the admission of California as a "free state," provided for a territorial government for Utah and New Mexico, established a boundary between Texas and the United States, called for the abolition of slave trade in Washington, DC, and amended the Fugitive Slave Act.
The Compromise of 1850 consists of five laws passed in September of 1850 that dealt with the issue of slavery and territorial expansion. ... As part of the Compromise of 1850, the Fugitive Slave Act was amended and the slave trade in Washington, D.C., was abolished.
The Compromise of 1850 contained the following provisions: (1) California was admitted to the Union as a free state; (2) the remainder of the Mexican cession was divided into the two territories of New Mexico and Utah and organized without mention of slavery; (3) the claim of Texas to a portion of New Mexico was ...
The Compromise of 1850 failed to settle the tensions that continued to divide the nation during the next decade and did not establish a principle that could be applied unequivocally to territories outside the Mexican Cession. Extremists in both sections were displeased with the Compromise.
Of all the bills that made up the Compromise of 1850, the Fugitive Slave Act was the most controversial. It required citizens to assist in the recovery of fugitive slaves.
James Madison offered the idea of counting three out of five slaves toward the population, which was a compromise between the Northern desire of counting three out of four slaves for taxation and the Southern plan of counting one out of four slaves for taxation.
The Compromise of 1850 granted California admission as a free state upsetting the balance. But to keep the Southern state happy, the Fugitive Slave Law was passed as well.
As part of the compromise California entered the Union as a free state, the trading of slaves was abolished in Washington, DC, an amendment was made to the fugitive slave act, a territorial government was established in Utah, and the boundary between Texas and New Mexico was established.
Annotation: The most divisive element in the Compromise of 1850 was the Fugitive Slave Law, which permitted any African American to be sent South solely on the affidavit of anyone claiming to be his or her owner. As a result, free African Americans were in danger of being placed in slavery.
When Texas sought to enter the Union in 1845 as a slave state, federal law in the United States, based on the Missouri Compromise, prohibited slavery north of 36°30' parallel north. Under the Compromise of 1850, Texas surrendered its lands north of 36°30' latitude.
The compromise bought the continued existence of the United States as a country for nearly 75 years. The morality of the compromise was and remains legitimately open to question. But without it, there would likely have been no Union to defend in the Civil War.
Although each side received benefits, the north seemed to gain the most. The balance of the Senate was now with the free states, although California often voted with the south on many issues in the 1850s. The major victory for the south was the Fugitive Slave Law. In the end, the north refused to enforce it.
The Compromise of 1850 was key in delaying the start of the Civil War until 1861. It temporarily lessened the rhetoric between northern and southern interests, thereby delaying secession for 11 years. Clay died of tuberculosis in 1852. One wonders what might have happened if he had still been alive in 1861.
There were four main compromises that were necessary in order to adopt and ratify the Constitution. These compromises were the Great (Connecticut) Compromise , Electoral College , Three-Fifths Compromise , and Compromise on the importation of slaves .
The Continental Congress debated the ratio of slaves to free persons at great length. Northerners favored a 4-to-3 ratio, while southerners favored a 2-to-1 or 4-to-1 ratio. Finally, James Madison suggested a compromise: a 5-to-3 ratio. All but two states--New Hampshire and Rhode Island--approved this recommendation.
The Three-Fifths Compromise was a part of a series of compromises between Northern and Southern representatives enacted by the Constitutional Convention of 1787, which declared that three-fifths of the slave population in a state would be counted for purposes of determining representation in Congress and direct ...
By September, Clay's Compromise became law. California was admitted to the Union as the 16th free state. In exchange, the south was guaranteed that no federal restrictions on slavery would be placed on Utah or New Mexico. Texas lost its boundary claims in New Mexico, but the Congress compensated Texas with $10 million.
Introduction: My name is Mrs. Angelic Larkin, I am a cute, charming, funny, determined, inexpensive, joyous, cheerful person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.
We notice you're using an ad blocker
Without advertising income, we can't keep making this site awesome for you.
