0
What else can I help you with?
What effect did the compromise of 1850 have on sectional differences?
It settled most differences over slavery.
Why did the US Congress agree to the Missouri Compromise?
To address the conflict over slavery
Missouri Compromise of 1820 and what it had to do with the civil war?
A successful compromise which drew a clear line in the sand - no slavery North of that line. This kept the peace for thirty years until the admission of the new territories acquired from Mexico. This required a new compromise, and that one did not last. Its provisions served to widen the sectional differences, and brought war closer.
Why was sectional compromise impossible in 1860?
Sectional compromise did not work in 1860 for many reasons. One of them being that this was the time during the great potato famine in Ireland, so the refugees cascaded into the northern states in the 1850's. Therefore, the north had no room. Once the Europeans were in America, they had no desire for the practice of slavery, and the north states were not convinced to compromise over slavery. The new compromise was put out for grabs, but Lincoln rejected it because he would not allow the extension of slavery. Also, the Crittenden Compromise would allow new slave states, but Lincoln would not accept this, either.
Was the compromise of 1850 a wise effort to balance sectional differences or a futile attempt to push slavery issue out of sight?
It would hardly have pushed slavery out of sight, when the new Fugitive Slave Act drew it to the attention of millions of Northerners who had never taken an interest in it before. A wise effort? We might say a well-meant effort. But the admission of the huge territory of California seriously upset the balance that had been achieved by the Missouri Compromise.
What effect did the compromise of 1850 have on sectional differences?
It settled most differences over slavery.
Why did the US Congress agree to the Missouri Compromise?
To address the conflict over slavery
Why did sectional differences grow in 1820s?
Because of regional differences, especially those concerning the issue of slavery
What were the sectional differences between the north and south?
the north banned slavery while the south allowed it
Missouri Compromise of 1820 and what it had to do with the civil war?
A successful compromise which drew a clear line in the sand - no slavery North of that line. This kept the peace for thirty years until the admission of the new territories acquired from Mexico. This required a new compromise, and that one did not last. Its provisions served to widen the sectional differences, and brought war closer.
Why was sectional compromise impossible in 1860?
Sectional compromise did not work in 1860 for many reasons. One of them being that this was the time during the great potato famine in Ireland, so the refugees cascaded into the northern states in the 1850's. Therefore, the north had no room. Once the Europeans were in America, they had no desire for the practice of slavery, and the north states were not convinced to compromise over slavery. The new compromise was put out for grabs, but Lincoln rejected it because he would not allow the extension of slavery. Also, the Crittenden Compromise would allow new slave states, but Lincoln would not accept this, either.
Why did sectional differences grow in the 1820's?
Because of regional differences, especially those concerning the issue of slavery
What were the causes of the sectional tensions?
The sectional tensions in the United States during the 19th century were primarily driven by differences in economic interests, social structures, and political power between the North and South. The North's industrial economy clashed with the South's agrarian reliance on slavery, leading to deep ideological divides. Additionally, debates over the expansion of slavery into new territories fueled conflicts, as both regions sought to maintain or expand their influence. The failure to find a political compromise on these issues ultimately exacerbated divisions, culminating in the Civil War.
How did the two main constitutional compromises deal with the various sectional differences between the states?
The two main constitutional compromises—the Great Compromise and the Three-Fifths Compromise—addressed sectional differences by balancing representation and addressing slavery. The Great Compromise established a bicameral legislature, giving states equal representation in the Senate while basing House representation on population, which favored populous states. The Three-Fifths Compromise allowed southern states to count three-fifths of their enslaved population for representation purposes, thus giving them more political power while placating northern states concerned about the ethics of slavery. Together, these compromises sought to create a fragile unity among the diverse interests of the northern and southern states.
What was the meaning of the Missouri Compromise?
There were two Missouri Compromises. The one in 1820 sought to keep the balance of slave states and free states equal in number. Thirty years later, the Missouri Compromise of 1850 attempted to accomplish the same goal and did so. These compromises were necessary as slavery became a tough issue to solve. There were strong sectional differences on slavery, and compromises were required to keep the nation whole and free of armed conflict over the issue.
Was the compromise of 1850 a wise effort to balance sectional differences or a futile attempt to push slavery issue out of sight?
It would hardly have pushed slavery out of sight, when the new Fugitive Slave Act drew it to the attention of millions of Northerners who had never taken an interest in it before. A wise effort? We might say a well-meant effort. But the admission of the huge territory of California seriously upset the balance that had been achieved by the Missouri Compromise.
How did the 1860 election increase sectional tensions?
Because the newly-elected Lincoln would not agree to any extension of slavery. So the final attempt at compromise failed.
