whether or not to become a free state
Missouri Compromise Tariff of Abominations Internal Improvements
The correct chronological order of the events is as follows: the Three-Fifths Compromise (1787), the Missouri Compromise (1820), the Compromise of 1850 (1850), and finally the Emancipation Proclamation (1863). The Three-Fifths Compromise established how slaves would be counted for representation, the Missouri Compromise addressed the balance between slave and free states, the Compromise of 1850 dealt with issues arising from the Mexican-American War, and the Emancipation Proclamation declared the freedom of slaves in Confederate states during the Civil War.
Allowed California to be admitted to the Union as two states - North California and South California, divided along the line of the Missouri Compromise.
Because of slavery
Became issues that aroused the common people to political action and fueled the New Democracy.
Missouri became a slave state and Maine was a free state. Slavery Missouri became a slave state and Maine was a free state.
Following the acquisition of the enormous Louisiana Purchase, there was a big debate about which parts would be slave country and which parts would be free soil. The Missouri Compromise was an attempt to simplify the issue by setting a single parallel (line of latitude), and ruling that slavery would be illegal everywhere North of this line, however far West it extended. The line was the Southern border of Missouri, and if North and South would agree on this, then Missouri could be admitted as a slave-state. The Compromise lasted quite well until more extensive new terrirories were acquired from Mexico in 1848.
To balance the number of free and slave states.The solution to the missouri compromise was done by henry clay. He spent about 30 years trying to fix the problems that kept occurring with it. The solution enacted by Henry Clay in 1807 that fixed all the issues with the missouri compromise of 1820 was that if you havent noticed this isnt the right answer yet you need to get better at math xD.
Both Missouri Compromises, the one in 1820 and the following one in 1850, recognized that sectionalism that already existed. The acts of compromises were made to place these sectional issues on the "back burner" so to speak, so that the Federal government could function properly in other areas not associated with slavery. The recognition that sectionalism was not going to disappear, however, should have been a wake up call.
Because politicians don't have to physically do the fighting (politicians are cowards).
No, the Missouri Compromise did not forever end the debate on slavery in the United States. While it temporarily resolved issues related to the expansion of slavery by establishing a boundary between free and slave states, it ultimately highlighted the deepening divisions between the North and South. The compromise was later rendered ineffective by events such as the Kansas-Nebraska Act and the Dred Scott decision, which reignited tensions and contributed to the outbreak of the Civil War.