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.
they said let my people go they said let my people go
Henry Clay proposed the comprimise of 1850
It was the 3/4ths comprimise, basically saying that slaves counted as 3/4 of a person, and therefore if you were a slave owner, you could cast 3/4 of a vote for each slave you owned in addition to your personal vote. Hope this helps!
i dont actually know for sure, but i believe that states had to have boundaries and duties before they could be added. the states had certain powers that the government didnt have, such as taxing people. states had to comprimise and cooperate by giving full faith and credit to public civil acts of the other states. they also had to return slaves and servants who crossed the border.
The Missouri Compromise had stated that all states above the 36 30 parallel would be free, and all below it would be slave states. This had established a begrudging peace between the North and the South, which lasted until the Kansas Nebraska Act of 1854, which repealed the compromise and introduced the concept of popular sovereignty in determining whether a state would be slave or free.
the Missouri comprimise was written by Henry clay
Virginia comprimise
John C. Calhoun, Daniel Webster and Henry Clay organized the comprimise.
Connecticut comprimise
yes
YES
It was not the Great Comprimise, or my wiener. So it must be the three fifths comprimise.
Connecticut comprimise
Roger Sherman.
Hiak, city
the great comprimise
comprimise