Compromise of 1850 Earlier You Read About the Missouri Compromise and the Wilmot Proviso

Home , Compromise of 1850, Wilmot Proviso

Compromise of 1850 Earlier you read about the Missouri Compromise and the Wilmot Proviso. Keep them in mind as you read here

What is a compromise? A compromise is a resolution of a problem in which each side gives up demands or makes concession. Earlier you read about the Missouri Compromise. What conflict did it resolve? It kept the number of slave and free states equal by admitting Maine as free and Missouri as slave and it provided for a policy with respect to slavery in the Louisiana Territory. Other than in Missouri, the Compromise prohibited slavery north of 36°30' N latitude in the land acquired in the Louisiana Purchase. Look at the 1850 map. Notice how the "Missouri Compromise Line" ends at the border to Mexican Territory. In 1850 the United States controls the 36°30' N latitude to the Pacific Ocean. Will the United States allow slavery in its new territory?

Slavery's Expansion Look again at this map and watch for the 36°30' N latitude Missouri Compromise line as well as the proportion of free and slave states up to the Civil War, which begins in 1861.

WSBCTC 1

This map was created by User: Kenmayer and is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported license (CC-BY 3.0) [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:US_Slave_Free_1789-1861.gif].

Here's a chart that compares the Missouri Compromise with the Compromise of 1850.

WSBCTC 2

Wilmot Proviso During the Mexican-American War in 1846, David Wilmot, a Democratic congressman from Pennsylvania, proposed in an amendment to a military appropriations bill that slavery be banned in all the territories acquired from Mexico. Wilmot's amendment failed, but in the debate over it southerners in both the Whig and Democratic parties argued against it and northerners of both parties argued for it. This sectional (North versus South) rather than party division signaled the end of the Second American Party System.

Slavery and Political Parties Slavery began to break down the Second American Party System in 1844 when the Liberty Party emerged to challenge slavery in a national political campaign. The Liberty Party opposed the admission of any slave state to the Union, advocated

WSBCTC 3 the end to slavery in Washington, D.C., the abolition of the interstate slave trade, and denying political office to any slaveholders. The Liberty Party attracted 44,000 northern votes in 1844 and thus denied the presidency to the architect of the Missouri Compromise Henry Clay, the Whig Party's candidate. [The election between the Democrat James K. Polk and the Whig Henry Clay was very close as less than 40,000 votes separated the two.]

The Liberty Party's stance on slavery was too extreme for most northerners and so another party appeared, the Free Soil Party. Free Soilers did not approve of slavery but were willing to allow it to continue where it already existed unlike the Liberty Party abolitionists. What they adamantly opposed was slavery's extension into new and unorganized territories (like those just acquired from Mexico). They opposed the Missouri Compromise because extension of its 36°30' line would have allowed slavery in much of present-day Arizona, New Mexico, and the southern half of California. By 1854 this "free soil" philosophy was embraced by another third party, the Republican Party.The election of a Republican, Abraham Lincoln, in 1860 would lead directly to the secession of southern states and the start of the Civil War.

Chart comparing political parties when questions about the expansion of slavery came to dominate the national political scene from the mid-1840s until Lincoln's election in 1860..

WSBCTC 4

Popular Sovereignty What is sovereignty? It means independence. A sovereign state is a self-governing one. What is popular sovereignty? In 1848 the Democratic nominee for president Lewis Cass proposed it as a way to resolve the slavery question. Under popular sovereignty, the citizens of a territory would vote on whether to allow slavery. Cass never made clear when those citizens would vote: would they vote as a territory or when they applied for statehood? In the 1848 election, the Free Soil Party opposed popular sovereignty while Cass the Democrat and war hero Zachary Taylor the Whig avoided making a clear statement about slavery in the newly acquired Mexican Cession. The Free Soil Party attracted 10 percent of the vote, another strong showing for a party based on limiting slavery. Taylor won the election but died in office.

WSBCTC 5 Compromise of 1850 The candidates may have avoided the issue of slavery in the new territories in 1848, but by 1850 the nation had to face it. The California Gold Rush resulted in thousands racing there to make their fortunes. California's population exploded and the territory applied for statehood. Utah, home to thousands of Mormon pioneers, also applied for statehood. Would they enter the Union as slave or free?

The Compromise of 1850 resolved the issue of California's status: it entered the Union as a free state. The Mormon practice of polygamy delayed Utah's statehood until the 1890s after the Church ended the practice. The Compromise addressed California's status and that of the other territories as well as other issues concerning slavery in a series of bills. Here's a summary.

1. California admitted as free state. 2. Slavery in the rest of Mexican Cession not specified. The Compromise bill said only that New Mexico and Utah would have no "restriction or condition on the subject of slavery." 3. Texas's boundaries resolved. 4. Slave trade in the District of Columbia was abolished. [Remember that the Liberty Party wanted slavery itself abolished in the District.] 5. Stronger fugitive slave law enacted. [Remember that the Constitution in Art. IV, Sec. 2, Para. 3 required the return of runaway slaves.]

Effects of the Compromise People rejoiced in the streets of Washington, D.C., when the Compromise passed. What had the Compromise achieved? Did

WSBCTC 6 the Compromise resolve the slavery question in the rest of the Mexican Cession (e.g., in New Mexico)? The Compromise said nothing about slavery in New Mexico and Utah. To northerners, the Compromise meant that a territorial legislature could exclude slavery. Southerners assumed that slavery could not be excluded at least until statehood.

Though some history texts assert that popular sovereignty would decide slave or free when the territories applied for statehood, in reality the meaning of the Compromise was left to the courts. If the territorial legislatures had passed an antislavery measure then the courts would have had to determine its constitutionality. You read about the Dred Scott Supreme Court case that ruled that territories had no authority to issue such measures.

What was the Compromise of 1850's most significant effect? It delayed the Civil War for 10 years. In those 10 years, the North grew in strength as immigration increased its population and industrialization increased its wealth and production capacity.

Chart showing legislation and decisions about slavery. The chart's title repeats the words of New York Senator William Seward who in 1858 warned that the sectional conflict over slavery represented an "irrepressible conflict."

WSBCTC 7

WSBCTC 8