America's history is plagued by scores of controversies and tough decisions made by crafty lawmen. One of the greatest controversies, perhaps, is the issue of slavery, for which thousands upon thousands of men fought and died. Many opposed slavery morally, and some even economically, but everyone had their own opinions on it. The North, however, took action on slavery with laws like the Kansas-Nebraska Act and the Compromise of 1850. These two acts harbor a host of moral dilemmas and make many people wonder just what the politicians who wrote them were thinking; however, these bills, along with other bills, helped to stop slavery in its tracks.
To begin, the moral arguments of the Compromise of 1850 were numerous and very heated. The North wanted to keep slavery out of California, the state in question, but the South wanted California to be entered as a slave state. In addition to this, California had already requested to be a free state, so the North and California benefitted from this part of the compromise (Compromise 1). The North and the South were still divided on other current issues, such as the current fugitive slave laws. Henry Clay, the designer of this compromise and many others, wanted to satisfy both sides of the thirty-sixth degree line, so he strengthened and amended the Fugitive Slave Act (Brinkley 355). Antislavery supporters were infuriated by this, but could not change the decision on the act. These are just a few of the moral problems that arose about slavery during the Compromise of 1850's conceiving. …show more content…
Abolitionists were fervent in their belief that all new states annexed should be free states, and in the case of California, the abolitionists got what they wanted. Also, antislavery supporters in Congress argued tirelessly and fought for key parts of the compromise, such as the
To begin, the moral arguments of the Compromise of 1850 were numerous and very heated. The North wanted to keep slavery out of California, the state in question, but the South wanted California to be entered as a slave state. In addition to this, California had already requested to be a free state, so the North and California benefitted from this part of the compromise (Compromise 1). The North and the South were still divided on other current issues, such as the current fugitive slave laws. Henry Clay, the designer of this compromise and many others, wanted to satisfy both sides of the thirty-sixth degree line, so he strengthened and amended the Fugitive Slave Act (Brinkley 355). Antislavery supporters were infuriated by this, but could not change the decision on the act. These are just a few of the moral problems that arose about slavery during the Compromise of 1850's conceiving. …show more content…
Abolitionists were fervent in their belief that all new states annexed should be free states, and in the case of California, the abolitionists got what they wanted. Also, antislavery supporters in Congress argued tirelessly and fought for key parts of the compromise, such as the