The Missouri Compromise Vs. The Nullification Crisis

985 words - 4 pages

The Missouri Compromise and the Nullification Crisis were both very noteworthy events in American history. The significance of the two not only laid in the events themselves, but also the time period in which they occurred and what they foreshadowed. In short, the Missouri Compromise was an act of Congress passed in 1820 between the two faction of United States Congress, that is, the pro-slavery faction and the anti-slavery factions. The compromise primarily involved the regulation of slavery in the western territories of the United States. Although it prohibited slavery in the Louisiana Purchase Territory north of the 36 30 degree latitude, it carved out an exception for Missouri.
The Nullification Crisis arose during the presidency of Andrew Jackson and was precipitated by South Carolina’s 1832 Ordinance of Nullification. In short, South Carolina in that ordinance challenged the power of the federal government to impose the federal Tariffs. It declared the federal Tariffs of 1828 and 1832 illegal and in South Carolina. Thus, the Nullification Crisis focused on the States’ rights, while the Missouri Compromise’ main focus was on slavery. Although the reasons for the Nullification Crisis and Louisiana Compromise differed, they both resulted from the growing tension in America during the early 1800s. At that time, the country was having trouble agreeing on very important issues and it showed in the occurrence of these events, as well as others. The Missouri Compromise was more significant than that of the Nullification Crisis because the issue of slavery was one that had presented itself many times and had led to many conflicts in the history of the United States. It also challenged the right of the Federal government to pass laws which impacted certain aspects of the States’ right to self-government while still maintaining a “union”. Such pressing issue had to be resolved for the sake of America’s future. In an effort to resolve these issues, compromises such as the one in 1820 were reached. In my opinion Thomas Jefferson was correct in his analysis of the Missouri Compromise; it served as a “bell”, a clear signal that the country would soon split because of the rising tension between State and Federal government, and the citizens.
Following the war of 1812, there was an economic boon in the north fueled by the industrial manufacturing. Tension aroused in the United States between the Northern and Southern States, whose economy was fueled by the industrial manufacturing and the Southern States, whose agricultural industry was fueled by slavery. As a result, the nation could not find a financial balance between agriculture in the Southern states and manufacturing in the Northern states. The North had access to rivers and ports which made trade and transportation more efficient. This reduced the need for slave labor. The South, on the other hand, because its economy was mainly based on farming, was dependent on slave labor. The...

Find Another Essay On The Missouri Compromise vs. the Nullification Crisis

The Missouri Compromise and the Compromise of 1850

770 words - 4 pages disagreed with the expansion of slavery, while south agreed to expand slavery throughout new territories and regions. The north's decision was based on factors such as political and economical threat instead of a moral threat, as it was depicted in the Missouri Compromise. However, the Compromise of 1850 , showed a more argument towards the morality threat, making it more united than ever. The Missouri Compromise had an interesting political action

Andrew Jackson and the Nullification Crisis

846 words - 4 pages Andrew Jackson had led the nation from 1829 to 1837. During his presidency, there were two issues he had faced, one of them being the Nullification Crisis. The Nullification Crisis was a major issue led by John C. Calhoun, who at the time was Andrew Jackson’s vice president. Calhoun and the supporters of the nullification believed in state’s rights, and that the states could reject federal laws if they believed it to be unconstitutional. It all

According to the Missouri Compromise, Slavery Would be Tolerated Everywhere or No Where

1851 words - 8 pages what the North and South wanted. This was called the Missouri compromise. During the late year of 1819, Missouri wanted to be recognized as a state. This however scared the north as they wanted to be a slave state. Missouri becoming a slave state would have disrupted the balance and caused the number of slaves state to be higher than that of the free states. The north feared this because that meant that slaves states would be dominant over free

The Three-fifths Compromise

4846 words - 19 pages slave representation. From December 8, 1819 to March 3,1820, Congress argued over the admission of Missouri to the Union. The three-fifths compromise was at the forefront of the battle, since the desire of the North to limit slave representation was its reason for not wanting to admit Missouri as a slave state. The Missouri compromise which was established to settle the problem, did not end the Missouri question, however. Missouri's state

The Need to Compromise

1527 words - 6 pages An individual often pursues either love or money figuring that is the only way to happiness. However, usually, the real path to happiness is through compromise between love and money. This is the situation in Jane Austen's novel Pride and Prejudice. Austin first shows us two unsuccessful marriages to show that compromise between love and money is necessary to find the perfect match. Both these unsuccessful marriages lack the aspect compromise

Don't compromise the presidency

684 words - 3 pages government, made up of several parties, could implement and achieve new policies that benefited Indonesia was a failure. The result was a weakened executive arm of government (the presidency), a split House and political and policy inertia for the past five years. Accepting a running mate from a coalition party partner would repeat Yudhoyono’s mistake, and seriously compromise Jokowi’s presidency and mandate. So the strategy for Jokowi should not be

Missouri Rejects the Vision of Joseph Smith

1321 words - 6 pages The great state of Missouri doesn’t exactly have the most welcoming of reputations, or at least in the 1830’s it didn’t. The newest state in the union at the time, Missouri was attracting settlers of all types. As Missourians established themselves and acquired land, another sizeable group was moving in. Members of the Church of Mormon has been told by their prophet that land in northwestern Missouri had been marked by God as a New

Poverty vs. Equality and the Foreclosure Crisis

1172 words - 5 pages . Scenario two, however, is going to take some work. It’s doable, but only if each and every citizen lends a huge helping hand. These scenarios are directly associated with the foreclosure crisis as they both have the same “security” issues. This foreclosure crisis is a problem that is eminent, and will continue if drastic measures are not taken. People are afraid, because of this crisis, to gamble with their money and or hand it to another human

Politics and the Art of Compromise

1186 words - 5 pages Politics and the Art of Compromise Politics is referred to as the "art of compromise". It is essential to a democratic society. Elected officials meet in legislative chambers to hammer out policies that all constituents can live with. Successful politicians learn early on the survival value of compromise. Economist Donald Wittman (1995: 154) correctly observes, "That is what good politicians do: create

The Compromise of 1850: A Temporary Solution

1075 words - 5 pages Compromise, according to the New Oxford Dictionary, is an agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions. Throughout history, favored compromises, as well as controversial ones, have been made, such as the Compromise of 1850. Arguably one of the most debated compromises in the history of America, the Compromise was first proposed by Henry Clay on January 29, 1850, (, and was intended to ease the

Importance of the Connecticut Compromise (Great Compromise) in the Creation of the American Constit

820 words - 3 pages Importance of the Connecticut Compromise (Great Compromise) in the Creation of the American Constitution After America was recognized as an independent country from England, the new republic went through almost twenty years worth of trial and error to find a government that would satisfy the needs of the citizens, the states, and the central national government. The most memorable, and influential, action of this time would have to be

Similar Essays

The Missouri Compromise Essay

499 words - 2 pages difficult situations between the sections. The Compromise of 1820 stopped the crisis between the North and the South., when they had to decide whether the Missouri should be a free state or slave state. To continue, the Compromise Tariff prevented South Carolina from seceding during the Nullification Crisis. Also, some politicians, such as Henry Clay thought that a civil war would occur if the compromise did not take any effect. The Compromise

The 1820 Missouri Compromise Essay

1132 words - 5 pages crisis. The compromise was thought to settle the slavery falling-out issue, and the sectional conflict didn’t grow until Missouri compromise was repealed by Dred Scott. Dred Scott was a former slave who had been bought into the United States in 1833, he then was moved to a territory Nth of lat 36 degrees 30 minutes where slavery had been forbidden. Scott then, with the help of anti-slavery lawyers, sued for freedom on the grounds of having twice

The Missouri Compromise Essay

1368 words - 6 pages between the South and the North, the Missouri Compromise was passed. The compromise would allow Missouri to enter the union as a slave state, and Maine as a free state; keeping the number of states pro-slavery and anti-slavery even. However, the compromise did not accomplish everything that congress had hoped. The Missouri Compromise was a poor attempt to end the dispute over slavery in America because it did not please the Southern or Northern states

Jackson Vs. Calhoun And The Nullification Crisis

1437 words - 6 pages Federal government to stand firm" (The Nullification 2). This negotiation gradually reduced the tariffs over a period of ten years until they returned down to the level which had existed in 1816. Jackson and Calhoun both signed the compromise and the crisis ended without bloodshed. Many people argue that it was due to the negotiating skills of Henry Clay, not Jackson, which enabled the Union to remain in tact. However, had Jackson not passed the