THE COMPROMISE OF 1850

THE COMPROMISE OF 1850

Until 1845, it had seemed likely that slavery would be confined to the areas where it already existed . It had been given limits by the Missouri Compromise in 1820 and had no op- portunity to overstep them . The new territories made renewed expansion of slavery a real likelihood .

Many Northerners believed that if not allowed to spread, slavery would ultimately decline and die . To jus- tify their opposition to adding new slave states, they pointed to the state- ments of Washington and Jefferson, and to the Ordinance of 1787, which forbade the extension of slavery into the Northwest . Texas, which already permitted slavery, naturally entered the Union as a slave state . But the California, New Mexico, and Utah territories did not have slavery . From the beginning, there were strongly conflicting opinions on whether they should .

136

Southerners urged that all the lands acquired from Mexico should be thrown open to slave holders . Antislavery Northerners demanded that all the new regions be closed to slavery . One group of moderates suggested that the Missouri Com- promise line be extended to the Pa- cific with free states north of it and slave states to the south . Another group proposed that the question be left to “popular sovereignty .” The government should permit settlers to enter the new territory with or with- out slaves as they pleased . When the time came to organize the region into states, the people themselves could decide .

Despite the vitality of the aboli- tionist movement, most Northerners were unwilling to challenge the exis- tence of slavery in the South . Many, however, were against its expansion . In 1848 nearly 300,000 men voted for the candidates of a new Free Soil Party, which declared that the best policy was “to limit, localize, and discourage slavery .” In the immedi- ate aftermath of the war with Mex- ico, however, popular sovereignty had considerable appeal .

In January 1848 the discovery of gold in California precipitated a headlong rush of settlers, more than 80,000 in the single year of 1849 . Congress had to determine the sta- tus of this new region quickly in order to establish an organized gov- ernment . The venerable Kentucky Senator Henry Clay, who twice before in times of crisis had come forward with compromise arrange-

ments, advanced a complicated and carefully balanced plan . His old Massachusetts rival, Daniel Web- ster, supported it . Illinois Demo- cratic Senator Stephen A . Douglas, the leading advocate of popular sovereignty, did much of the work in guiding it through Congress .

The Compromise of 1850 con- tained 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 satisfied by a payment of $10 million; (4) new legislation (the Fugitive Slave Act) was passed to apprehend runaway slaves and return them to their mas- ters; and (5) the buying and selling of slaves (but not slavery) was abolished in the District of Columbia .

The country breathed a sigh of relief . For the next three years, the compromise seemed to settle near- ly all differences . The new Fugitive Slave Law, however, was an imme- diate source of tension . It deeply offended many Northerners, who refused to have any part in catch- ing slaves . Some actively and vio- lently obstructed its enforcement . The Underground Railroad became more efficient and daring than ever .

Place Your Order Here!

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *