moderates
Lincoln was only 11 years old when then Missouri Compromise was made. I doubt that he had any strong feelings about it. He did not regularly go the school-- he may not even have heard about it at the time.
The Missouri Compromise of 1820 prohibited slavery in the remaining Louisiana Purchase lands north of the 36°30′ parallel, which was Missouri's southern border, except for the state of Missouri itself.
This was meant to settle the question of slavery in the Western territories that were applying to become states of the Union. It was agreed to draw one line of latitude, North of which slavery would be illegal. The line was the Southern border of Missouri. The Compromise worked well enough for thirty years, until after the Mexican war, when the future of California was being debated. The new state would extend so far either side of the Missouri line that both sides claimed it. So the Compromise broke down, and had to be replaced by another which did not last. It has often been commented that if there could have been two states, Northern California and Southern California, meeting on the Missouri line, the Civil War could have been avoided.
They thought it was a God given right to extend from Atlantic to the pacific so they thought it was meant for them to occupy the land from east to west.
1 year
moderates
Secretary of State James Buchanan
Secretary of State James Buchanan
Secretary of State James Buchanan
Lincoln was only 11 years old when then Missouri Compromise was made. I doubt that he had any strong feelings about it. He did not regularly go the school-- he may not even have heard about it at the time.
The Missouri Compromise only related to the territories acquired from France under the Louisiana Purchase. California was acquired much later, from Mexico. A few years later, it was proposed that the line of the Missouri Compromise should extend all the way to the Pacific. But if California had to remain as a single state, it was simply too big to fit the system. (If it had been admitted as two states - North and South California - war might have been avoided.)
The Missouri Compromise of 1820 prohibited slavery in the remaining Louisiana Purchase lands north of the 36°30′ parallel, which was Missouri's southern border, except for the state of Missouri itself.
It allowed the slave-empire to extend Westward, so you could claim that it gave substance to the future Confederacy. But if there had been no compromise, the war would have started much sooner.
No, Missouri does not.
The senator that offered a compromise to extend the 36/30 around the globe was John Crittenden.Answered by: Simen.K
This was meant to settle the question of slavery in the Western territories that were applying to become states of the Union. It was agreed to draw one line of latitude, North of which slavery would be illegal. The line was the Southern border of Missouri. The Compromise worked well enough for thirty years, until after the Mexican war, when the future of California was being debated. The new state would extend so far either side of the Missouri line that both sides claimed it. So the Compromise broke down, and had to be replaced by another which did not last. It has often been commented that if there could have been two states, Northern California and Southern California, meeting on the Missouri line, the Civil War could have been avoided.
The United States should extend from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific Ocean.