Should The Missouri Compromise: Should Missouri Be A Slave State?

Words: 545
Pages: 3

Louisiana entered the Union in 1812, the rest of the Louisiana purchase was organized as Missouri territory. The Missouri territory was building on a base of Spanish and French inhabitants. The area west and north of St. Louis started to grow rapidly. In 1817, the Missourians petitioned for statehood. The population of the territory exceeded 60,000 by 1818. Most of the settlers were southerners would have moved into the valleys of the Arkansas and Missouri rivers. Many of them owned slaves and wanted Missouri to be admitted as a slave state. So this raised a huge question, should Missouri be a slave or free state? The solution to this huge question was called the Missouri Compromise. The Missouri Compromise was an effort by Congress to stop political and sectional rivalries caused by the request of Missouri becoming a slave state in 1819. At the time the United States had twenty two states that were evenly divided between slave and free states. So, there were eleven free states and eleven slave states. If Missouri was admitted as a slave state, free and slave states would no longer be evenly balanced. This would also mean that congress would be accepting the fact of expansion of slavery. …show more content…
The Missouri issue was the main issue they focused on. The rapidly growing North controlled the House of Representatives. Southerners thought it was essential to preserve a balance in the Senate. The Northerners said that Missouri extended hundreds of miles north of the Ohio River, which was at that time considered to be the natural division of slavery. The debate was about political influence, rather than if slavery was right or wrong. Northerners objected to adding new slave states because under the 3-5ths Compromise these states would be overrepresented in Congress. Angry debate lasted for months in