8.9.5
Analyze the
significance of the States’ Rights Doctrine, the Missouri Compromise (1820), the
Wilmot Proviso (1846), and the Compromise of 1850, Henry Clay’s role in Missouri
Compromise and the Compromise of 1850, the Kansas-Nebraska Act (1854). The Dred
Scott v. Sanford decision (1857}, and the Lincoln-Douglas debates
(1858).
When the States’ Rights Doctrine was drawn to protect the rights and powers of the states
against those of the federal government, the 13 American states ratified the
United States Constitution. Historically, the doctrine has been invoked by
states in every section of the country whenever they have felt their
jurisdiction threatened. One extreme case of The States’ Rights Doctrine
was that in 1860 and 1861, 11 Southern states carried the states’ rights to the
point of seceding from the Union. However, their defeat in the Civil War
put an end to this extreme interpretation of states’ rights, but it is still
generally agreed that the states have a jurisdiction which the federal
government has no right to invade.
In 1818, Missouri Compromise was born out of the Missouri’s application for the admission
to the Union. At that time, the U.S. House of Representatives was
dominated by the slave-free states while the Senate had the balance of 22
senators each from the slave-free states and the slave states. Because of
the fear that that balance might be broken by the statehood of Missouri, slave
state, the Senate defeated Representative James Tallmadge’s amendment to the
bill enabling Missouri to become a state. During the next session of
Congress, Maine applied for the admission to the Union. Then one slave
state and one slave-free state would not threaten the balance in the Senate, so
Jesse B. Thomas of Illinois introduced the Missouri Compromise into the Senate,
and it was adopted by Congress in March, 1820 to admit Maine as a slave-free
state and authorize Missouri to form a state constitution before it could become
a state. In its constitution Missouri forbade any free blacks or mulattoes
to enter the state. As a result, before Congress would admit Missouri, a
second Missouri Compromise became necessary. Henry Clay worked out this
compromise worked out in part, and the compromise required the Missouri
legislature not to deny black citizens of the U.S. their constitutional
rights. With this understanding, Missouri was admitted to the Union in
1821. Despite all the troubles, the Missouri Compromise was repealed by
the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854.
To President James K. Polk’s request of $2 million for purchase of new territory
from Mexico David Wilmot Democratic Representative from Pennsylvania, offered an
amendment, which was called the Wilmot Proviso. This amendment declared that
slavery should be forbidden in any territory obtained by the U.S. with the $2
million. The House of Representatives approved the amendment on Feb. 15,
1847, but the Senate with the strong Southern representation defeated it.
So for several years, the Wilmot Proviso was offered unsuccessfully as an
amendment to many bills. After the proviso became the basis for bitter
debate over the issue of slavery in the territories, at last the issue of the
proviso was settled in 1862 when Congress banned slavery in any territory of the
United States.
By Congress in 1850, the Compromise of 1850 was hoped to settle the strife between
the opponents of slavery in the North and the slave-owners of the South and
passed. There were five measures in this Compromise of 1850. Concessions by
the South to the North authorized the abolition of the slave trade in the
District of Columbia and the admission of California as a free state. The third
measure was the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850 which was the concession to the South
providing the runaway slaves to return to their masters. The Fourth measure was
that the states such as California were ceded to the United States and Mexico
combined with New Mexico. Lots of changes happened with the states. The
fifth measure involved Texas already in the Union as a slave state to be awarded
$10 million in settlement of claims to adjoining territory, further
strengthening the South. Even though for a few years the Compromise seemed
to have ended the strife and the laws in the Compromise helped to delay civil
war for about 10 years, the Compromise measures resulted actually in a gradual
intensification of the hostility between the slave and the slave-free states.
Henry Clay along with Daniel Webster
and Stephen A. Douglas led in winning the passage of the Compromise of 1850 as
he worked for the Compromise of 1820, so the role of Henry Clay must have been
significant to the two Compromises.
By Congress in 1854 Kansas-Nebraska Act, a law, which was passed. This law
provided that two new territories Kansas and Nebraska to be made from the Indian
land west of the bend of the Missouri River and north of 37 degrees north
latitude. The senator Stephen A. Douglas, who was influenced especially by
Missourians and might have been influenced by his own desire for a railroad from
Chicago to the Pacific Coast, introduced into Congress the bill with a provision
for “popular sovereignty” in Kansas and Nebraska, which allowed all the
questions of slavery in the new territories to be decided by the settlers.
That was directly contrary to the Missouri Compromise of 1820. That was
not all. The senator Douglas was persuaded by the Southerners to declare
the Compromise of 1820 “inoperative and void.” Consequently, though the
antislavery people kept long and bitter debate about the Kansas-Nebraska Bill,
President Franklin Pierce supported the bill and it became a law that not only
made slavery legally possible in a vast new area but also revived the bitter
quarrel over the expansion of slavery died down by the Compromise of 1850.
Therefore, the Kansas-Nebraska Act might have hastened the Civil War.
Dred Scott sued his previous owner’s widow for his freedom on the basis of his former
residence in a free state and a free territory, Illinois and Wisconsin. In
the course of the suit, Scott became legally the property of John F. A. Sanford
of New York. That is why Dred Scott v. Sanford Decision came into being, this
decision handed down by the U.S. Supreme Court was an important ruling on the
issue of slavery. The Dred Scott decision declared in 1857 that no
Negro--free or salve—could not claim the United States citizenship and also that
Congress could not prohibit slavery in the United States territories. The
ruling contributed to leading the nation closer to the Civil War, and after the
Civil War it also influenced the introduction and 1868 passage of the
14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution which extended citizenship to
former slaves and gave them full civil rights.
That series of debates was known as the Lincoln-Douglas Debates for 1858 senate race
Lincoln and Douglas were nominated to run against each other and two candidates
had a series of debates at seven places. The debates centered on the
extension of slavery into free territory, and throughout the debates Douglas
defended the policy of the Kansas-Nebraska Act while Lincoln argued that the
Supreme Court in the Dred Scott decision had opened the way for slavery to enter
all the territories. In other words, Lincoln regarded slavery as a moral,
social, and political evil and insisted that there was a fundamental difference
between Douglas and himself throughout the campaign, but Douglas ignored the
moral question of slavery. Despite that Douglas was re-elected, Lincoln
became a national figure by the debates and his speeches made a strong
impression on many influential eastern Republicans. It would not be excessive to
presume that these debates paved the way for Lincoln to become President of the
United States in 1861.
More Information:
1.
http://www.socialstudies.com/c/@BZ98SNiy_x41s/Pages/search.html?Record_Type=Products&CA_Standard=85