Compromise of 1850 and Sectional Tensions over Slavery

Overview of the Compromise of 1850

  • Year: 1850

  • Context: Intense debate between North and South regarding the expansion of slavery into the Western territories post-Mexican-American War.

  • Resolution sought through compromise despite limited effectiveness.

Background Context

Effects of the Mexican-American War

  • Mixed Outcomes:

    • Positive: Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo significantly expanded U.S. territory.

    • Negative: Created substantial tensions over slavery expansion into newly acquired territories.

Key Developments Leading to the Compromise

  1. Wilmot Proviso (1846)

    • Proposal by anti-slavery Congressman to ban slavery in territories from the Mexican-American War.

    • Failed, but intensified Southern fears of political power loss.

  2. California's Statehood (1849)

    • California's application to join the Union as a free state threatened the balance of slave vs. free states in the Senate.

  3. Oregon Territory (1848)

    • Acquired with a ban on slavery, contributing to sectional tensions.

Distinct Factions and Solutions Proposed

  1. No Restrictions on Slavery

    • Advocated by John C. Calhoun who claimed owning slaves was a constitutional right.

    • Notion of "slavery follows the flag" supporting slaveholder rights in any territory.

    • Embraced by deep Southern states.

  2. Extension of the Missouri Compromise

    • Proposed by Northern Democrats, including James Buchanan.

    • Suggested extending the Missouri Compromise’s line to the Pacific, allowing slavery south of the line and banning it north of it.

  3. Popular Sovereignty

    • Concept first introduced by Lewis Cass and later supported by Stephen Douglas.

    • Suggested that residents of territories decide slavery laws themselves ("the people’s power").

    • Lacked clarity on implementation and enforcement of decisions made by populations already living in the territories.

  4. Restrict Slavery to Current Boundaries

    • Proposed primarily by abolitionists and members of the Free Soil Party.

    • Aimed to halt the spread of slavery, arguing that diminished political power would lead to its eventual demise even in the South.

Henry Clay's Compromise of 1850

  • Clay proposed to unite conflicting interests and resolve tensions.

  • Key Provisions of the Compromise:

    • California admitted as a free state.

    • Creation of New Mexico and Utah territories, slavery to be determined by popular sovereignty.

    • Abolition of the slave trade in Washington D.C., but slavery itself remained legal.

    • Enactment of a stricter fugitive slave law.

Reactions to the Compromise

  • General Discontent: No group fully satisfied with the compromise, but it provided temporary relief.

  • **Sectional Tensions: **

    • Popular sovereignty upset those favoring strict adherence to the Missouri Compromise's geographic lines.

    • Stricter fugitive slave laws angered the North; abolitionists felt they were being forced to support slavery.

Issues Arising from the Fugitive Slave Law

  • Requirements of the Law: Mandated that citizens assist in the capture and return of runaway slaves without a jury trial.

  • Abolition Response:

    • Many northern abolitionists nullified the law actively.

    • Some states enacted personal liberty laws, granting trials to accused runaway slaves.

    • Resistance was complicated since alleged runaways were barred from testifying.

  • Effects of Federal Law:

    • Supreme Court's ruling in Abelman v. Booth (1859) reaffirmed federal supremacy, maintaining strict enforcement of the fugitive slave law amid state actions.

Conclusion

  • Henry Clay's Attempt: Although ambitiously conceived, the compromise could not sufficiently address differing positions on slavery's expansion leading to increased tensions rather than resolution.

  • Next Steps: Subsequent discussions and events further complicated the issues surrounding slavery leading up to the Civil War.