5.4 - The Compromise of 1850

Expansion and Slavery Debate:

• Background: Post-war expansion fueled by Manifest Destiny heightened tensions around slavery as abolitionists and settlers opposed its spread, while slave owners advocated for it to capitalize on new lands.

• Southern Frustration: Southerners resented restrictions like the Missouri Compromise which barred slavery in the Louisiana Purchase territories. They were also displeased with the limited territorial gains from the Mexican War, which they felt were inadequate for their agricultural expansion needs.

Southern Expansion Efforts:

• Cuban Ambitions: Southern leaders sought to expand into Cuba, viewing it as an ideal location for slavery-based plantations. Initial attempts included President Polk's failed offer to purchase Cuba from Spain for $100 million and subsequent military expeditions that ended in failure.

• Ostend Manifesto: Under President Franklin Pierce, the U.S. sought to acquire Cuba through diplomatic means. However, when plans leaked, they were vehemently opposed by anti slavery congress members, forcing Pierce to abandon the initiative.

Territorial Acquisitions:

• Gadsden Purchase (1853): Despite failing to secure Cuba, President Pierce managed to purchase land from Mexico that would facilitate the southern transcontinental railroad, enhancing U.S. infrastructure and territorial continuity.

Three Main Positions on Slavery in New Territories:

• Free-Soil Movement: Supported by Northern Democrats and Whigs, this movement backed the Wilmot Proviso, advocating that territories should be free from slavery, focusing solely on opportunities for free whites. They formed the Free-Soil Party in 1848, promoting "free soil, free labor, and free men," and supported internal improvements and free homesteads.

• Southern Stance: Plantation owners viewed restrictions on slavery's expansion as violations of their rights to move property (slaves) into new territories. Moderates among them were willing to extend the Missouri Compromise line to the Pacific, allowing slavery south of the line.

• Popular Sovereignty: Proposed by Senator Lewis Cass, this approach suggested that the residents of each new territory should decide the slavery issue by vote, an idea that attracted moderate support.

Compromises to Preserve the Union:

• California's Statehood: The influx from the 1849 Gold Rush prompted California to draft a state constitution that banned slavery. Despite California's location south of the Missouri Compromise line, where slavery was permitted, the state sought admission as a free state. President Taylor, a Southern slaveholder himself, supported this move, further inflaming tensions as it contradicted the established sectional balance.

• Secession Threats: Southern radicals ("fire-eaters") discussed secession, particularly as California's admission as a free state seemed imminent.

Henry Clay's Compromise of 1850:

• Provisions:

  • Admit California as a free state.

  • Establish Utah and New Mexico territories with popular sovereignty on slavery.

  • Resolve the Texas-New Mexico boundary dispute with federal debt assumption.

  • Ban the slave trade (not slavery) in the District of Columbia.

  • Enforce a new, stringent Fugitive Slave Law.

• Debate and Outcomes:

  • Debated vigorously by Senators Henry Clay, Daniel Webster, and John C. Calhoun.

  • Opposed by abolitionists like William H. Seward of New York, citing moral principles above constitutional law.

  • Passed through separate legislative pieces by Senator Stephen A. Douglas and signed by President Millard Fillmore after Taylor's unexpected death.

Impact of the Compromise:

• Short-Term Relief: Temporarily eased tensions by balancing free and slave states, but controversial elements like the Fugitive Slave Law and popular sovereignty led to increased sectional strife, setting the stage for future conflicts.