Explain Why The Us Never Found A True Compromise

1160 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Dred scott v. sandford consequnce

Have you ever wondered why the U.S could not find a true compromise for forty years? Well, The U.S was unable to find a true compromise for slavery between 1820-1860, Because no side was ever truly happy with the compromises. Either the north was angry or the south was angry. There were always tensions in the north and south and it caught up with them. The tensions were between the abolitionists and the Confederates. This made the north and south go in separate paths in one country. A quote from Abraham Lincoln's inauguration speech supports this “ A house divided cannot stand”. I will be showing you with my 4 sources why the U.S never found a true compromise to make both sides happy. The sources are all from History.com. The first source is about the Missouri compromise. The second source is about the compromise of 1850. The third source is about the election of 1860. The fourth source is about the Kansas-Nebraska act. And finally, the rebuttal source is about Dred Scott V Sandford.

First of all, I will be introducing you to my first source which is about the Missouri Compromise. The first compromise about slavery was what started the tensions between the …show more content…

In the election of 1860, Abraham Lincoln wanted to make a decision on slavery. Either abolish it or keep it. Many Democrats did not like this idea and wanted to do something else. But Even Democrats who should have been the party of unity could not make a decision. It states in the text “They instead were divided on the issue of slavery. Southern Democrats thought slavery should be expanded, but Northern Democrats opposed the idea.” To further support my position, It states “Southern Democrats felt states had the right to govern themselves while Northern Democrats supported the Union and a national government.” This quote relates to my thesis because no side was ever happy with a decision, including the party of

Show More
Related

  • Rhetorical Analysis Of Lincoln's House Divided By Abraham Lincoln

    992 Words  | 2 Pages

    Lincoln was a very smart lawyer and politician. During his “House Divided” speech he asked the question, “Can we, as a nation, continue together permanently, forever, half slave, and half free?" When he first asked this question, America was slowly gaining the knowledge and realizing that as a nation, it could not possibly exist as half-slave and half-free. It was either one way or the other. “Slavery was unconstitutional and immoral, but not simply on a practical level.” (Greenfield, 2009) Slave states and free states had significantly different and incompatible interests. In 1858, when Lincoln made his “House Divided” speech, he made people think about this question with views if what the end result in America must be.

    Read More

  • Difference Between North And South Dbq

    466 Words  | 1 Pages

    As the result, due to the difference between the north and south. They north and south viewed each other differently as two different kind of people. Stephen Douglas explained that the view of southern plantation owners (document 5). They believed the laws fit the northern, not the southern. Therefore, they made their own rules and treated themselves as individual nation which then turned into the confederacy. As a result, Abraham Lincoln gives a speech explaining that in order to succeed we need to work as a nation instead diving each other setting disputes with one in others. (document 4) Therefore, Lincoln goes on to say that two house can’t be divided because they can’t not stand by themselves, but Lincoln challenge the secession of the south because he wonders it would be erupting but he inferred because of slavery. Therefore, the north and south began to have

    Read More

  • What Caused The Civil War Dbq

    554 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the 1860’s the United States weren’t united because of the issue of slavery. The civil war was never just about getting the union back together, but about making it count and getting rid of slavery. The south wanted their slaves and would say they are “-the happiest, and in some, the freest people in the world”. (Doc 5) However, the north knew that was not true because of Harriet Beecher Stowe's “Uncle Tom’s Cabin”. In 1854 when the Kansas-Nebraska act was passed it caused some issues. Anti-slavery supporters were not happy because they did not want expansion of slavery, but the pro-slavery supporters weren’t happy because they wanted slavery everywhere for sure. (Doc. 7)The Kansas-Nebraska act caused trouble before it was even passed, Senator Charles Sumner argued against and attacked pro-slavery men causing Preston Brooks to beat Sumner with a cane. The south praised Brooks while the north felt for Sumner. (Doc 8) In 1858 during his acceptance speech Lincoln said his famous line, “A house divided

    Read More

  • The Breakup of the Union

    841 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the years paving the way to the Civil War, both north and south were disagreeable with one another, creating the three “triggering” reasons for the war: the fanaticism on the slavery issue, the Kansas-Nebraska Act, and the separation of the Democratic Party. North being against the bondage of individuals and the South being for it, there was no real way to evade the clash. For the south slavery was a form of obtaining a living, without subjugation the economy might drop majorly if not disappear. In the North there were significant ethical issues with the issue of subjugation. Amazing measures to keep and dispose of subjugation were taken and there was never a genuine adjusted center for bargain. Despite the fact that there were a lot of seemingly insignificant issues, the fundamental thing that divided these two states was bondage and the flexibilities for it or against. With these significant extremes, for example, John Brown and Uncle Tom's Cabin, the south felt disdain towards the danger the Northerners were holding against their alleged flexibilities. The more hatred the South advanced, the more combative they were to anything the Northerners did. Northerners were irritated and it parted Democrats over the issue of bondage and made another Republican gathering, which included: Whigs, Free Soilers, Know Nothings and previous Democrats and brought about a split of segments and abbreviated the street to common war. Southerners loathed the insubordination of the north and started to address how they could stay with the Union.

    Read More

  • The Differences Between North And South

    996 Words  | 2 Pages

    Additionally, the majority of states had conflicts between slavery in their territory, one of them dealt with missouri. Missouri applied for admission into the Union as a slave state; this became a problem because missouri ruined the balance for free slaves and slave states. The northern states wanted to ban slavery from occurring in missouri because the unbalanced situation it put towards the other states. In response, the southern states declared how congress doesn’t have the power to ban slavery in missouri. However, Henry Clay offers a solution, the missouri compromise of 1820. Missouri admitted as slave state and Maine becomes a free slave state. Slavery is banned in Louisiana creating a 36 30 line in missouri’s southern border; this maintained the balance in the U.S senate.

    Read More

  • Analysis Of The Irrepressible Conflict Between The North And South

    1061 Words  | 3 Pages

    The new territories and the discussion of whether they would be admitted to the Union free or slave-holding stirred up animosity. The Compromise of 1850 which offered stricter fugitive slave laws, admitted California as a free state, allowed slavery in Washington D.C., and allowed new territories to choose whether they wanted to be slave-holding or free was supposed to help ease tension between the North and South. Yet Southern states wanted more new territories to be slave-holders so the institution of it would continue to grow. They believed slavery was a way of life and as Larrabee said in his senate speech, “You cannot break apart this organization and this system that has intertwined itself into every social and political fiber of that great people who inhabit one-half of the Union.” (“There is a Conflict of Races”).

    Read More

  • The U.S. Constitution and Slavery

    408 Words  | 1 Pages

    The south and the north made numerous compromises to create a great nation. The first indirect compromise was when the constitution didn’t mention slavery in the constitution, they left that for the states to deal with. After years after when the congress decide to stop the slave trade in 1808, they gave the south time to adjust to this but they new that by the time the slave trade died line was over the slave would have reproduces and they would have more slaves. Third compromise gave the south more power. They had notice that they had less seats in the house of representative. States with the most slaves, for instance Virginia and Maryland, were get out number in the house of representative, so the compromised to have the slave counted as part of the population. They got three counts for every five slaves. This helped balance the house of representative.

    Read More

  • Bleeding Kansas

    1444 Words  | 3 Pages

    The Compromise of 1850 brought relative calm to the nation. Though most blacks and abolitionists strongly opposed the Compromise, the majority of Americans embraced it, believing that it offered a final, workable solution to the slavery question. Most importantly, it saved the Union from the terrible split that many had feared. People were all too ready to leave the slavery controversy behind them and move on. But the feeling of relief that spread throughout the country would prove to be the calm before the storm.

    Read More

  • The 1860 Presidential Election

    1204 Words  | 3 Pages

    The 1860 presidential election was one of the nation’s most memorable. The north and the south sections of the country had a completely different vision of how they envisioned their home land. What made this worse was that their views were completely opposite of each other. The north, mostly republican supporters, want America to be free; free of slaves and free from bondages. While on the other hand, the southern supporters, mostly democratic states, wanted slavery in the country, because this is what they earned their daily living and profit from.

    Read More

  • Events Leading To The Civil War

    866 Words  | 2 Pages

    The South did not want to lose slavery and wanted future territories to have slavery. Compromise is impossible to achieve. Going back to the quote, "The 1850's was a time of attempted compromise when compromise was no longer possible. " During the 1850's compromise was attempted by both the North and South and failed. It failed because both sides wanted different things, and this made compromise impossible.

    Read More

  • Events that Led to the Civil War

    1792 Words  | 4 Pages

    The existence of slavery was the central element of the conflict of the north and south. Other problems existed that led to this succession but none were as big as the slavery issue. The only way to avoid the war was to abolish slavery, but this was not able to be done because slavery is what kept the south running. When the south seceded it was said by Abraham Lincoln that “ a house divided against itself cannot stand. I believe this government cannot endure permanently half slave and half free.” Because slavery formed two opposing societies and slavery could never be abolished, the civil war was inevitable. These were all the reasons why the south seceded from the union, this succession was eminent and there was no plausible way to avoid it.

    Read More

  • Constitutional Congress

    413 Words  | 1 Pages

    Another compromise made between the states was concerning Slavery. The North wanted The Slaves in the south to be accounted for so that they could be counted as people and be taxed. The South wanted the Slaves also to be counted but only for the population count, They knew if they had a higher population then they could have more representatives in the congress, and thus have more power. They Reached a compromise known as the Three/Fifths plan, This plan indicated that three/fifths of the slave population would be accounted for both taxation and towards the population of the state. This way both were happy.

    Read More

  • Summary And Slavery: The Causes Of The Missouri Compromise

    672 Words  | 2 Pages

    Tempers raged and arguments started because of the Missouri Compromise. The simple act caused many fatal events because of what was changed within the United States. It may not seem like a big thing now, but before slavery had been abolished, the topic of slavery was an idea that could set off fights. The Missouri Compromise all started in late in 1819 when the Missouri Territory applied to the Union to become a slave state. The problem Congress had with accepting Missouri as a slave state was the new uneven count of free states and slave states. With proslavery states and antislavery states already getting into arguments, having a dominant number of either slave or free states would just ignite the flame even more. Many representatives from the north, such as James Tallmadge of New York, had already tried to pass another amendment that would abolish slavery everywhere. Along with other tries to eliminate slavery, his effort was soon shot down. The fact that people couldn’t agree on whether or not slavery should be legalized made trying to compose and pass a law nearly impossible.

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Michael F. Holt's The Political Divisions That Contributed To Civil War

    809 Words  | 2 Pages

    Both sides desired a republican form of government. Each wanted a political system that would “protect the equality and liberty of the individuals from aristocratic privilege and…tyrannical power.” (404) However, the north and south differed greatly in “their perceptions of what most threatened its survival.” (404) The secession by the south was an attempt to reestablish republicanism, as they no longer found a voice in the national stage. Prior to the 1850s, this conflict had been channeled through the national political system. The collapse of the two-party system gave way to “political reorganization and realignment,” wrote Holt. The voters of the Democrats shifted their influence toward state and local elections, where they felt their concerns would be addressed. This was not exclusively an economically determined factor. It displayed the exercise of agency by individual states. Holt pointed out, “[T]he emergence of a new two-party framework in the South varied from state to state according to the conditions in them.” (406) The “Deep South” was repulsed by the “old political process,” most Southerners trusted their state to be the safeguards of republicanism. (404) They saw the presidential election of Abraham Lincoln, a member of the “the anti-Southern Republican party,” as something the old system could not

    Read More

  • Effects Of The Compromise Of 1877

    724 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Compromise of 1877 was brought on by the disputed election of 1876. The Democrats had clearly won but this was disputed by a few large states. This election was between Democrat Samuel J. Tilden and Republican Rutherford B. Hayes. Congress created a commission to try and resolve this dispute and the commission voted in favor of Hays giving him all of the electoral votes from the disputed states, which in turn gave Hayes the victory. This led to a series of compromises from the Republicans to the Southern Democrats which included: “The appointment of at least one southerner to the Hayes cabinet, control of federal patronage in their areas, generous internal improvements, federal aid for the Texas and Pacific Railroad, and most important, withdrawal of the remaining federal troops from the South” (Brinkley 363). These compromises are what jump started The “New South”. The compromises were supposed to help create a more Republican South but in turn did the exact opposite. The South went in a different direction. The “New South” had a lot of effects on of different subjects. The economy in the south grew tremendously, the politics changed and were predominantly democratic, and the African Americans were losing all of the things they had gained through reconstruction. These changes where exactly what Southern Whites wanted and in some cases it is what the Republicans hoped would happen. The “New South” was a reality by the end of the 19th century and changed the South by growing economically, becoming Democratic politically, and having even worse race relations.

    Read More

More about Explain Why The Us Never Found A True Compromise

Open Document