Missouri Compromise (1820)

The Missouri Compromise of 1820 was a significant legislative agreement in the early 19th century aimed at resolving tensions between…

By Staff , in Historical Events in the USA , at September 27, 2024 Tags: 1820, politics, usa

Find Cheap Textbooks - Save on New & Used Textbooks at AbeBooks.com

The Missouri Compromise of 1820 was a significant legislative agreement in the early 19th century aimed at resolving tensions between slave states and free states in the United States. It primarily addressed the issue of slavery’s expansion into new territories and played a critical role in delaying the sectional conflicts that would eventually lead to the American Civil War. The compromise was brokered by Henry Clay, a prominent statesman known for his ability to mediate contentious issues.

Background and Context
Expansion and Slavery:
Following the Louisiana Purchase of 1803, the United States acquired a vast territory west of the Mississippi River, which raised the issue of whether slavery would be allowed in the newly acquired lands.
At this time, the U.S. was almost evenly divided between free states (where slavery was prohibited) and slave states (where slavery was permitted). Maintaining a balance of power in the U.S. Senate between free and slave states was a significant concern for both the North and South.

Missouri’s Application for Statehood (1819):
In 1819, the Missouri Territory applied for statehood, proposing to enter the Union as a slave state. This triggered a fierce debate in Congress, as admitting Missouri as a slave state would upset the delicate balance in the Senate between free and slave states, giving the South more political power.
The conflict reflected growing sectional tensions over the future of slavery, with Northern politicians opposed to the expansion of slavery into new territories and Southern politicians seeking to protect their interests by maintaining an equal number of slave and free states.

The Missouri Compromise of 1820
To resolve this conflict, Congress passed the Missouri Compromise in 1820, which consisted of three key provisions:
Admission of Missouri as a Slave State:
Missouri was admitted to the Union as a slave state, as originally proposed. This preserved the rights of existing slaveholders in the region but raised concerns about the expansion of slavery into the West.

Admission of Maine as a Free State:
To maintain the balance of power between free and slave states in the Senate, Maine was admitted as a free state. Maine had previously been part of Massachusetts, but it applied for statehood at the same time as Missouri. The admission of Maine balanced the admission of Missouri, keeping the number of free and slave states equal at 12 each.

36°30′ Line:
The most significant and long-lasting part of the compromise was the establishment of a boundary line for slavery in the Louisiana Territory. The compromise prohibited slavery north of the 36°30′ latitude (the southern boundary of Missouri) in all the territories of the Louisiana Purchase, except for Missouri itself. This essentially created a dividing line between free and slave territories in the West.
Immediate Consequences and Reactions

Temporary Peace:
The Missouri Compromise succeeded in temporarily defusing the political crisis over slavery and westward expansion. Both sides saw the agreement as a compromise that maintained the balance of power between the North and the South.
For the next few decades, the 36°30′ line served as the boundary between free and slave territories in the West, providing a temporary solution to the growing sectional conflict over slavery.

Northern Concerns:
Many Northerners were unhappy with the expansion of slavery into Missouri, fearing that it would lead to the spread of the institution into other western territories. The compromise was seen as a concession to the South, which maintained the right to expand slavery into new territories below the 36°30′ line.
Abolitionists in the North were particularly critical of the compromise, viewing it as a moral failure that allowed the continued spread of slavery.

Southern Concerns:
While the South secured Missouri as a slave state, some Southern politicians were uneasy about the restrictions imposed by the 36°30′ line. They feared that limiting slavery’s expansion would threaten the future political power and economic viability of the slaveholding states.
Many in the South saw the restriction on slavery north of the line as an infringement on their rights to expand their economic system into new territories.

Long-Term Implications
Sectional Tensions:
While the Missouri Compromise temporarily resolved the conflict over slavery’s expansion, it did not eliminate the underlying tensions between the North and South. It became clear that as the United States continued to expand westward, the issue of whether new states would permit slavery would continue to be a source of conflict.
The compromise was essentially a temporary measure, delaying the larger and more difficult questions about the future of slavery in America.

Legacy of the Compromise:
The Missouri Compromise stood for more than three decades as a defining feature of American politics. However, it was eventually undone by the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854, which allowed the settlers of those territories to decide for themselves whether to allow slavery (popular sovereignty). The repeal of the 36°30′ line led to renewed sectional conflict, violence in Kansas (“Bleeding Kansas”), and the formation of the anti-slavery Republican Party.
In 1857, the Dred Scott v. Sandford Supreme Court decision further eroded the Missouri Compromise by ruling that Congress did not have the authority to prohibit slavery in the territories, rendering the 36°30′ line unconstitutional. This decision deepened the national divide over slavery.

Prelude to the Civil War:
Although the Missouri Compromise helped to maintain peace between the North and South for a few decades, it was ultimately only a temporary solution. The growing divisions over slavery, particularly as new territories sought statehood, would eventually lead to the Civil War in 1861.