How did the question of the admission of new states (like Missouri & California) to the U.S. fuel the debate over slavery?
* Use your article on Westward Expansion from class and also pages 482-485 in your textbook.
* Please respond with 50 words or more.
62 comments:
The question of the admission of new states helped fuel the debates of slavery because the slave states and free states are equal in the senate, and the only way to keep it balanced is if there are the same number if slave states as free states. If for example, California joins as a free state then the senate can try to overpower the other half and then make it so that none of the states can have slaves, which might make the south decide that they don't want to be apart of the U.S. But if they join as a slave state, then this might force the North to have to help the South get more slaves, and they would lose all of there rights.
Amanda Flynn
The question of admission of new states to the U.S. fueled the debate over slavery because we wanted to have an equal amount of free states and slave states so that one wouldn't be able to control others and by adding new states there would have to be major decisions made over which ones should become free and which ones shouldn't in order to maintain that balance, thus adding to the debate of slavery.
Melissa Santos
Period: 3
Melissa Psaras Period 1
The admission of new states such as Missouri and California rose up the question as to whether these states would be slave states or free states. This not only sparked the question of the balance of slave and free state representatives in the Senate but also the question of will there always be a balance. A slave and free state can be admitted at the same time to keep that balance impartial, but will it always be like that? Will they always be able to keep that balance because some day it might be one or the other. The admission of Missouri and California sparked the anger that started to build up between the North and South which would eventually lead to the Civil War.
Sam Gertner Period 1
The question of the admission of new states fueled debate over slavery because it would cause an unbalance in the Senate. If a state was admitted into the Union and they were a free state, the free states would have the advantage in the Senate. This could work vice versa as well in favor of the southern states. If one side had more votes in the Senate, they would be able to pass lass easier since they have more votes.
The entry of new states into the country like Missouri and California sparked the debate over slavery by whether or not the states wanted to be free states and outlaw slavery or a slave state allowing it in the new state. This wasn't the only problem however, the impact of the previous point about whether they are free or slave states would break the balance of free states and slave states represented in the Senate. Another issue that could arise with the debate of slave vs. free states would be their influence in the Senate and if the free states had more representatives in the Senate, they could vote a certain way in their favor to bend the laws of the United States in the favor of the free states limiting the power of the slave states and the south.
Aidan McShane Period 8
Finbar Quinn period 2
The admission of California and Missouri fueled the slavery debate because the South thought that each side would attack the other. For example, the North would have too much power and make laws against slavery and the South would make laws with slavery.However due to the Missouri compromise let Missouri become a slave state California became a free state. So in conclusion,that's how admittance of states fueled the slavery debate.
The creation of new states like Missouri and California caused conflict because Missouri wanted to be a slave state, and that would upset the balance of representatives in the Senate, making it an unfair argument about slave laws. To solve this problem they created a line dividing the south from the north (slave from free) in the Louisiana Purchase. The problem with California was it was divided by this line so they didn’t know whether to make it a slave state or a free state. –Victoria Yencik, Period 3.
It fueled the debate by one main question, would this new state be a free or slave state? In the Missouri compromise, Missouri wanted to be a slave state but it would upset the balance in the senate. so we got Maine as a free state as Missouri and this way it would still be even and stay balanced. When we moved westward the same question kept coming up would it be a free or slave state? We came to California and they wanted to be free but the balance wouldn't be even and they could have cut it in half but they wanted California to be one state which was because that's where all the gold and riches were. So that one question kept coming up which helped to fuel the debate over slavery.
Michaela Csvihinka
period 1
The question of admission of the new states fueled the debate over slavery because both sides didn't agree. The north didn't want slavery but the south did and that caused big problems between them such as the Civil War. Another problem they had was that the South wanted the North to recover their slaves which a lot of people didn't agree to.
Caitlin D. P:3
Creating a new state could be a problem or advantage for both sides. If either the free states or slave states had more states on their side then they could influence the laws. For example the Wilmot proviso would ban slavery in the territory we gained from the Mexican American war.
Sarah Townson period 2
Samantha Sisson
Period 3
The admission of new states from the west meant that it would upset the balance of free and slave states. If there were more than one or the other it bothering the other side because they knew that in congress, any votes against their ways of life could be followed through because they were outnumbered. For each state there was arguments on what it would join as, and sometimes the people wouldn't get to choose.
The westward expansion process helped expand debate over slavery. After more people settled west, the population built up and when the population reached 50,000 they could become a state. The senate at the time was equally divided by number of free states, and slave states. If one was added to either side, they would gain majority in many voting scenarios and have less of a voice. Many people grew weary of this and had enough of this. Separation was imminent as the south even wanted to become an independent country.
-Tyler V
Many were angered because some thought that if California were admitted the people would not be able to protest against slavery if the senate gained support from them. Thus causing the southerners to exclude themselves from this civilization. It also sparked a controversial law that stated that if northerners were to find slaves in their area, they would have to return the fugitives to the southerners immediately. Of course the northerners were furious with the way slaves were so harshly treated. Clearly, this promoted even more hostility and kept the war-like behavior going strong. Thus leading the world into the Mexican- American war.
Cailinn Stockman Per. 2 1/30/15
Manaia Friend
1/30/15
Period 3
Adding more states to the union caused more debate over slavery. The states were categorized into two groups: free and slave states. They wanted the number of slave states to be the same as the number of free states. Adding another state would obviously upset the balance, therefore they would have to decide what kind of state the new state being added would be. This caused more debates.
California and Missouri created a big problem for the country. When California join half of Cali. was in "slave state" territory and the other in "free state" territory. This created a debate because the "slave states" wanted more land, they felt they didn't have enough. On the flip side the "free states" wanted to band slavery through out the whole country. For Missouri they came up with the Missouri Compromise. The Missouri Compromise was a line that split the land evenly with slaves and free states. However when a new state joined it upset the balance in congress. That created a bigger problem because people feared that which ever side was greater in number was going to make rules to benefit their side.
Bella Santos
per. 3
Tyler Gaughan per 8
The addition of states such as Missouri and California fueled the debate over slavery. New states means either a free state or a slave state, normally a free state would be in the north territories and a slave state south. The problem is that the amount of free and slave states are equal but if one got an extra state they might gain more power then the other.
Sam Gertner Period 1
The question of the admission of new states fueled debate over slavery because it would cause an unbalance in the Senate. If a state was admitted into the Union and they were a free state, the free states would have the advantage in the Senate. This could work vice versa as well in favor of the southern states. If one side had more votes in the Senate, they would be able to pass lass easier since they have more votes.
Kayla Plunkett period 8
The admission of new states to the U.S. fueled the debate over slavery because we didn't know whether to make the states slave states or free states. This disrupted to balance of slave/free states in the senate, and this wasn't what the people of the nation wanted. We wanted balance.
Megan O'Meara Period 3
The admission of states helped to fuel the debate over slavery because of the boundary lines. California should have been half slave and half free if we continued slave boundary lines into our new territory. Both sides wanted to have more states as free or slave, whichever lifestyle they followed, so they could control the senate. If you could control the senate, where laws are made, everything would be in favor of the way you like to live your life.
The question of admission of the new states to the U.S. fueled the debate over slavery because the sectionalism (being loyal to ones state more than there government). The southerners way of life was dependent on owning other people (slavery). The government was split between the northerners trying to abolish slavery and the southerners who where trying to keep it, resulting if fierce debates between admitting states as ether free states or slave states. This happened because if there was more of one type of state than the other than the group with more states will have more power than the other, and neither want to be the one with less power. So when new states wanted to be admitted to the Union, it fueled the slavery debate because of the balance power.
Mark Hammer
P3
The admission of new states (like Missouri & California) to the U.S. fueled the debate over slavery as it was disrupting not only the Missouri line within the Missouri Compromise of 1820 but it was abolishing the balance between the North and the South. Missouri was admitted as a slave state and had an advantage over the free states as it was right next to the new territory of the Louisiana Purchase. For this reason, the citizens of the slave state could easily flood into that are overruling it as slave state territory not giving the free states along the coast and to the east a chance. Also, because of the gold rush in 1849 the Missouri line was not allowed to split California in half as it ran right through the middle of it. It couldn't become split such as north and south Carolina or like today north and south Dakota because of the fact it was rich in gold. People from all over traveled there for the gold and it would only cause a bigger dispute if they had split it; it was sort of the powerhouse of the country at this point. However, California did become a free state.
Anna Civitelli Period 1
The question of the admission of new states (like Missouri and California) to the U.S. fueled the debate over slavery by ruining the balance of free and slave states in the nation. The slave states had an advantage over the free states as Missouri was boarding the Louisiana Purchase territory.
The admission of states into the U.S. fueled the debate about slavery because nobody wanted one side of the Senate to have more representatives from slave states. Also, everyone argued about if the new states should be slave or free and if the Missouri Compromise line was used in the unpopulated land.
DJ F
Period 1
The Missouri Compromise stated that any territory above the Louisiana Territory line would be slave free. This caused problems because when other locations became more heavily populated and requested to be a state, would half be slave free and the other half have slavery? There were many debates, for example, some people thought that California should be a free state because most of it is over the Missouri Compromise line.
Madeline Winters
Period 1
With the admission of new states the debate over slavery was fueled by the balance of the senate. The government wanted to have equal members of the senate, half for slavery and half against it. If one state want to join either side another state would have to switch sides too in order to have balance in the senate.
lilly macfadyen- period 8
Jake mccarthy pr.1
The admission of states to the United States like Missouri and California fueled the battle of slavery by making people decide if the state will be allowed to have slavery so every time a new state was added or wanted to be added it would disrupt the balance in senate between the non slavery side and the slavery side.
The question of new states to feel the US debate over slavery started by the Missouri Compromise. Missouri prohibited slavery in the new states because they didn't think it was right and that's what got other states to think about it. Kaitlyn Reagan
Because the new state would separate the Missouri compromise. California would upset being a slave state state or a free state.
brett cahill p:3
the admission of new states to the U.S. fueled debate over slavery because before they joined as a state there was an equal amount of slave and non slave states. there was 11 of each but once another state come to join the senate wont be even for slave and non slave so they have to make a compromise for what to do with slavery between the states
Period 1
Amanda Hanna
The admission of new states fueled the debate over slavery because according because some states slavery and some did not. One of the compromises that settled this was when Missouri requested to be part of the union as a slave state. The Northerners believed that this would upset the balance in the senate because each state would have two votes therefore it would make the South more powerful than the North. They would make decisions and laws based on their needs and favor themselves(pro-slavery laws). The Southerners felt that their economy would be threatened if slavery was abolished because of the farming and the necessity of slaves to help them. The Missouri compromise was created to settle these differences, some of the terms include; Missouri would as admitted as a slave state and Maine would be admitted as a free state, and land north of the southern border of Missouri would be free. More problems arose more than 30 years later, when California sought admission into the Union. The Missouri Compromise line was in the middle of California. The Northerners thought it should be a free state because most of the territory was north of the line but the Southerners feared, that this would upset the balance in the Senate. They believed that the Northerners would make laws that favored anti-slavery and there were many issues between the sections. The Southern states even threatened to secede from the nation if California was admitted as an anti-slavery state. Proposals were made and declined, tensions were very high between the sections.
Michelle A.
Period 1
Alyssa Noce
Period 2
The question of the admission of new states fueled the debate over slavery, by making an uneven amount of slave states and free states. The people also wanted the votes of the slaves to count so they would get more votes for their state. That wouldn't be fair to the free states because the amount of votes would be uneven.By doing this, the balance in the Senate would also be thrown off.
The states, Missouri impacted us by either going to one side slaves ir the free this would of impacted us of what they picked by the senate going to one side or the other California also had the same thing but the most important thing that impacted us is the gold rush of 48 it impacted us in wealth and such. They impacted us in slavery by then either going to one side misuse said if and slave s came to the free land bring them back even if the bystanders see the have to bring them back. But both had a big impact and many ways with slavery.
Joey Samonek per:3
The admission of new states to the U.S. fueled the debate over slavery because if the number of slave states outnumbered the non-slave states (or the other way around), the slave states can vote for all states to be slave states or other matters. To keep things balanced, there would need to be equal amount of slave and free states.
Tommy Brisch
The admission of the states Missouri and California helped the U.S. fuel the debate over slavery because north of the Missouri Compromise line were all free slavery states and all southern states were slave states. With more people going to California because of the discovery of gold, the population started to increase. As a result California was granted more seats in the House of representatives. Californians impacted within the Senate was influential in determining whether or not there was going to be freedom for slaves or no freedom. Finally, California chose to become a free state which caused America to be a free country.
Hannah Epifano
Period:2
The question of the admission of new states like Missouri and California to the U.S. fueled the debate over slavery because if we added a slave state, we would have to add another state and make it a free state. We have to keep the amount of slave and free states equal so the balance in the senate is equal. Every time we added a new state to the United States of America, there was always one question, will it be a slave state or a free state?
Rachel C
period 1
The northerners argued that California should be a free state becuase most of its territory lay north of the Missouri Compro ise, but southerners feared that if free states held the majority in senate, it would be impossible to prevent anti-slavery attacks in the south. Furthermore, it also offset the blance of free and slave states.
Murray McCarthy
It fueled the debate over slavery because it threatened to be unbalanced between the free states and the slave states. If the amount of free and slave states were unbalanced then the one that made it unbalanced would have more power, in this case slave states. Also, many people had different opinions on if they wanted Missouri to be a free state or slave state.
Alexa Allan
Period 2
New states like Missouri and California fueled the debate over slavery because the people of America didn't know which state would become free or enslaved states. It also debated which side would have more power in the senate.
Brendan Andros per. 3
It
The question of the admission of new states to the U.S. fueled the debate over slavery because they needed to have an equal balance between free states and slave states. If they added more states, then the balances between slave states and free states would be messed up because there would either be more slave states or more free states.
Meghan Lancaster
Period 8
Caitlyn Gruber
period 8
The question of the admission of the new states like Missouri and California to the U.S. fuel the debate over slavery because they were debating if the new states should become free states with no slaves or slave states as they expanded westward. The Northerners wanted them to become states without slaves and the Southerners wanted the opposite. The Northerners wanted the slavery to stop spreading and they wear afraid that Southerners would get to much power.
The admission to the states of Missouri and California fueled the debated over slavery because it caused a continuous unbalanced struggle in the Senate. The Missouri Compromise drew a line across the union dividing it in 2. Missouri entered as a slave state and Maine entered as a free state. All was good until the Gold Rush in California when it received an influx of people to become a state. This then upset the balance in the Senate once again.
Kenny Schneider
Period 1
George Lazor period 8
It helped fuel the slavery debate because new admission would mean an upset in the senate and one side could out vote the other to make slavering legall. Also allowing new states in would mean a dabate in which states are slave and which aren't. And if more states want slavery then it gives them the majority.
The admission of California and Missouri into the U.S. fueled the debate of slavery. California was north of the Missouri Compromise line so northerners argued that it should be admitted as a free state. This would upset the balance in the Senate which angered them to the point where they threatened to secede from the U.S. After the Mexican-American War, a large area of land was gained. The Missouri Compromise didn't apply to this section of land and this worried northerners who feared the south would become too powerful if slave states spread.
Emma McCarthy
Period 8
This fueled up the debate because the North did not want another slave state and the South did not want another free state. Plus the North was complaining because if there were to many slave states the slaves vote would throw off the senate. The slaves would vote to and if there were to many slaves the voting would not be equaled out between the North and the South.
period 1
Maria Castro-Rodriguez
The Admission of California and Missouri into the United States helped fuel the debate on slavery because every time a state would want to join it would upset the balance in senate. When a new state would want to join either in the North or South, the government would then have to make a compromise to please the other side who wasn't getting a new state. Each time a state joined the South, another slave state was joining so the North had to get a non slave state to make it fair.
Campbell Halloran
The Admission of California and Missouri into the United States helped fuel the debate on slavery because every time a state would want to join it would upset the balance in senate. When a new state would want to join either in the North or South, the government would then have to make a compromise to please the other side who wasn't getting a new state. Each time a state joined the South, another slave state was joining so the North had to get a non slave state to make it fair.
Campbell Halloran
Michael wisentaner
The addition of states will make a huge argument in the slave debate because if we add another state then there will be more slave states or free states vis versa. This will then make the senate debate un fair because their are more states on one side than the other.
The question of the addmission of the new states helped fuel the debates of slavery because the U.S wanted the amount of slave states and free states to be equal so one couldnt "over rule" the other. Therefore, the Missouri Compromise came into play, it was a line that split the land evenly to separate the slave states and the free states.
Kelly Sipos
Period 8
The question of admission for new states, such as California and Missouri, fueled the debate over slavery because, as of that time, they had an even number of free(north) and slave(south) states, therefore, the Northerners and Southerners had an even number of representatives in the senate. Adding a new state to the south would give the south more representatives than the north and the same would happen if a new state was admitted to the
north.
Jessica Bajorinas
Lauren Rancourt
it would create a debate over slavery because either they would both be slave states or both be free states not one or the other. made it hard to decide if it would if they would be slave or free states and it made the debate hard to compromise
The south started to worry because if free states gained a majority in the senate,the south would not be able to block antislavery attacks like the Wilmot Proviso.There were other issues dividing the north and the south.North wanted the slave trade abolished, and the south wanted northerners to catch the people who escaped from slavery.
Briana Stockbridge per.2
The admission of new states to the US fueled the debate over slavery because the senate is supposed to be balanced and if there is an unequal amount of slave states and frees states, then the Senate wont be balanced and the government will be more biased towards situations. If California was admitted as a slave state, and if Missouri was too, then the Senate would be unbalanced and that is not good for the government. This led to serious debates over slavery.
Andrew period 3
they all thought it would bring throw off the number of free states and slave states causeing people to fight and would brake apart america at this time america is al ready divide to a point where it could brake apart. joey maillet
Mike Kusick p.8
The admission of new states field the debate of slavery because you have to decide whether or not the state is a free slave state or non free slave state. Also, if their is more then one state your upsetting the balance of power.
Because their is suppose to be a equal amount of slave and non slave states. If their was not then one would control the other.
Mike Kusick peiod.8
Admission of new states fuled the slavery debate because if their were more slave states then non slave states that would upset the balance in the senate. Making one side more powerful then the other. Making one side able to add more states. Or create more laws for the country to follow
And get more votes in the senate.
The admission of the new states, Missouri and California, fueled the debate over slavery. This is because in the senate the north and the south both had an equal amount of votes. Missouri and California became a problem because the state had to go to the north or the south, and it would through the balance off, causing the power in the senate to shift to the north or the south. Every time a state would enter for admission, either a compromise would have to happen or another state would also have to be made in order to keep the senate balanced.
Christina Moniz
Period 3
The admission of the new states Missouri and California fueled the debate over slavery becuase it made an uneven side in the free an slave states and if the northern or southern states had an uneven balance then the other side would have an advantage over the other because then ore people with be pro slavery or anti slavery if one side held the advantage.
Zach Hernandez P.1
The admission of the new states Missouri and California fueled the debate over slavery was because it made an uneven side in the free slave states, and the slave states. The uneven sides would have an advantage on their side. Dakota Northrop p. 3
This helped fuel the debate on slavery because the south wanted to make all the new states slave states. The north wanted to make the new states free states. The senate needed to balance out the slave and the free states so they were equal. They made the Missouri Compromise and anything oboe the line would be a free state and anything below would be a slave state. They thought this would be equal but then California became a free state and the north would end up having more free states in the union.
Max
The admission of new states fueled debate over slavery because the Southerners would send in people to vote for slave state admission. This was illegal and caused the Northerners to be outraged, especially since the South had larger states than they did. Also, with the gold found in California, the Southerners wanted their slaves to do the work for them. The Northerners were afraid that there would be too many slave states, which would unbalance the number of slave/free states and throw the country into turmoil. The Northerners and Southerners went back and forth, trying to prove what they believed in was right.
Sabrina P1
The addition of the new states of Missouri and California caused debates about slavery. The Senate wanted to maintain a balance between slave and free states. The bigger question arose because California could have been divided into two states, but they didn't want to do that because of the of the gold in the State. If the Senate became unbalanced it could cause the country to lean one way or the other on the slavery issue.
Mikaela D
Period 1
Post a Comment