The balance between slave-states and free states, so that neither side would dominate Congress.
This is a weird question ... nearly anything might NOT be part of the compromise. So ... a pitcher of iced tea was NOT part of the Missouri compromise.
Answer this question… California became a free state.
Senator Stephen A. Douglas put forth the argument that if the Missouri Compromise of 1850 really was a compromise, it had to put forward a consistent principle. If it did not then it was not a compromise, but instead a modus vivendi arrangement. The main problem of this characterization is that Douglas was asking a rhetorical question. Douglas was the one to know inasmuch as he helped put it together.
In 1820, politicians debated the question of whether slavery would be legal in the western territories. The Missouri Compromise permitted slavery in the new state of Missouri and the Arkansas Territory but it was barred everywhere west and north of Missouri.
Please rewrite the question. We can not know the statements given because you didn't write them, so we don't know the answer.
Missouri compromise
The Missouri compromise was one of the many ways the boundaries of America grew. The compromise admitted Missouri as a state and also brought the question of slavery to the forefront of many minds.
This is a weird question ... nearly anything might NOT be part of the compromise. So ... a pitcher of iced tea was NOT part of the Missouri compromise.
The question itself is wrong. The Missouri Compromise made Missouri and Maine states. Missouri as a slave state and Maine as a free state.
The Missouri Compromise of 1820 allowed Missouri to enter the Union as a slave state, Maine as a free state, and established a boundary prohibiting slavery north of latitude 36°30' in the Louisiana Territory. However, it only temporarily appeased tensions over slavery and ultimately failed to resolve the issue, leading to further conflicts such as the Civil War.
Answer this question… California became a free state.
It established what lands were considered free states.
An advantage to the Missouri Compromise of 1820 was that slavery would not be permitted in the territory that is now the state of Missouri. A disadvantage to the Missouri Compromise was that people who believed in slavery in the South could not move north to gain more land and keep their slaves.
Good question! The North benefited from the Missouri Compromise, because they received another state in the North (Maine) that did not allow slavery (because the North didn't like slavery.) The South benefited from the Missouri Compromise, because they received another southern state (Missouri) that was capable of having slaves. This way, both the North and the South had an equal amount of 12 Northern states and 12 Southern states.
Senator Stephen A. Douglas put forth the argument that if the Missouri Compromise of 1850 really was a compromise, it had to put forward a consistent principle. If it did not then it was not a compromise, but instead a modus vivendi arrangement. The main problem of this characterization is that Douglas was asking a rhetorical question. Douglas was the one to know inasmuch as he helped put it together.
I don't understand the question fully. I guess the Missouri Compromise which stated that one state (Missouri) would be a slave state and the other (Maine) would be free was overturned by the 13th amendment seeing as slavery was abolished across the entire United States of America. I guess that sort of answers your question.
both the Missouri compromise of 1820 and the compromise of 1850 settled conflicts between the north and the south over