People in Utah and New Mexico got to vote to decide if they wanted to be a slave or free state.
Popular sovereignty
The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854, proposed by Stephen A. Douglas of Illinois, in effect repealed the Missouri Compromise because it allowed the settlers in these two areas to decide whether or not to allow slavery. Since these territories were located north Missouri, they gave southern slaveholders an opportunity that had been closed to them since 1820.
Utah and New Mexico were to decide on their status as free or slave states through the principle of popular sovereignty, established by the Compromise of 1850. This approach allowed the residents of these territories to vote on whether to permit slavery when they applied for statehood. The decision was meant to ease tensions between pro-slavery and anti-slavery factions in the United States. However, it ultimately led to increased conflict and debate surrounding the issue of slavery in the territories.
Popular sovereignty was the right of the residents of these territories to vote themselves on the issue of slavery (in this case). In the Compromise of 1850, the territories of New Mexico and Utah were granted popular sovereignty to decide for themselves if slavery should be allowed or not in these areas.
Stephen Douglas' resolution of Henry Clay's slavery plan involved the introduction of the Kansas-Nebraska Act in 1854, which allowed settlers in those territories to decide for themselves whether to allow slavery through the principle of popular sovereignty. This effectively repealed the Missouri Compromise, which had prohibited slavery north of the 36°30′ parallel. Douglas believed that this approach would promote unity and democracy, but it ultimately intensified sectional conflict and contributed to the emergence of the Republican Party. The act led to violent confrontations in Kansas, known as "Bleeding Kansas," as pro- and anti-slavery factions clashed.
The Compromise of 1850 allowed the territories of New Mexico and Utah to decide whether they wanted slavery through the principle of popular sovereignty. This meant that the settlers in those territories would vote on whether to permit slavery, rather than having Congress make that decision for them. The compromise aimed to ease tensions between free and slave states following the Mexican-American War.
No. It was a compromise in the Congress to work out problems between some states as to which side they were on. People could not decide on their own to own slaves. Some people in the South didn't want slavery.
People in Utah and New Mexico got to vote to decide if they wanted to be a slave or free state.
The Compromise of 1850 did not allow any choice in the matter. It reflected the increasing difficulty of creating new slave-states. It was the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 that allowed the people of those two territories to vote on the slavery question. The only time it was tried (in Kansas), it led to terrible bloodshed, and was not tried again. The result was that Kansas rejected slavery.
Missouri compromise
The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 allowed voters in the territories of Kansas and Nebraska to decide whether to allow slavery through popular sovereignty. This overturned the Missouri Compromise of 1820, which prohibited slavery in territories north of a certain latitude.
It changed the balance of power which had previously existed by allowing those territories popular sovereignty to decide whether to allow slavery or not for themselves.
missouri compromise
Utah and New Mexico
Popular sovereignty-_-Apex
The factor used to decide whether an area could be open to slavery under the Missouri Compromise was its geographical location. This compromise established a line at latitude 36°30' where slavery would be permitted south of the line and prohibited north of it, with the exception of Missouri.
Popular sovereignty