As a result of the Mexican-American War, the United States acquired a large tract of western land. This acquisition raised fierce debate as to whether or not slavery should be permitted in the new territory. The tension heightened when California, a portion of the land acquired from Mexico, petitioned for statehood as a non-slave state. This threatened to upset the delicate balance between slave and non-slave state representation in Congress.
Senator Henry Clay of Kentucky attempted to effect yet another compromise between North and South after having facilitated both the Missouri Compromise of 1820 and the tariff compromise of 1833. Clay introduced the Omnibus Bill, which consisted of five measures granting concessions to both northerners and southerners.
New Territory and Popular Sovereignty
The first three measures organized territories and defined boundaries. California was to become a non-slave state as a concession to northerners. New Mexico Territory was to be created primarily from present-day Arizona and New Mexico, and Utah Territory was to be created primarily from present-day Nevada, Utah and Colorado. More importantly, the notion of popular sovereignty was to be introduced in New Mexico and Utah.
Under popular sovereignty, the people in the new territories would decide for themselves whether or not to permit slavery. This differed from territories acquired from the Louisiana Purchase, in which there was a definitive boundary between slave and non-slave regions. While popular sovereignty was generally accepted by both sides, the sectional powder keg nearly exploded four years later when the principle was extended to Kansas and Nebraska. Introducing popular sovereignty opened the door to later sectional unrest.
Controversies Involving Slavery
Another measure would abolish the slave trade in the District of Columbia. This led to the cession of Alexandria, a thriving slave trade center that was formerly part of D.C., back to Virginia. By merely changing the name of Alexandria’s location, slave commerce was not affected and both sides were satisfied. Not so with the measure regarding fugitive slaves.
The Fugitive Slave Act was a major concession to slaveholders. This required federal officials and private citizens in all states and territories to assist in capturing and returning suspected runaways to slavery. Those resisting the law or aiding runaways were subject to a heavy fine. Suspected runaways were not permitted to testify in their own defense. Officials were paid more for sending blacks into slavery rather than freeing them; as a result many free blacks were sent into slavery.
This law turned people who were formerly neutral regarding slavery into abolitionists. Many in the North derided the act as the “Man-Stealing Law” or “Bloodhound Bill,” while others saw it as a federal kidnapping scheme and resisted federal intrusion into their states. The law ultimately drove a deeper wedge between North and South, and it was a key step leading to civil war.
Passing the Measures
The five measures were fiercely debated in Congress for nine months. With help from proponents such as Senators Daniel Webster of Massachusetts and Stephen Douglas of Illinois, all the measures passed both houses of Congress. The final hurdle was signing the bills into law.
President Zachary Taylor, a southerner, opposed the compromise and threatened to veto the measures if they passed. However Taylor died in July 1850 and his successor, Millard Fillmore of New York, supported the compromise. Had Taylor lived, the measures most likely would not have passed and the compromise would not have been made. However President Fillmore signed the measures into law in September, and they became collectively known as the Compromise of 1850.
Legacy of the Compromise
The compromise was widely hailed as yet another successful attempt to avert division between North and South. Many felt that this was a firm agreement that would finally end the sectional animosity once and for all. However future events would prove that assertion wrong.
Resentments toward popular sovereignty, resistance to the strict fugitive slave law, and mistrust over motives turned the 1850s into a turbulent decade. The Compromise of 1850 ultimately increased sectional resentment and only postponed the inevitable conflict, which was to the North’s advantage. In the 1850s the North increased its industrialized power while the South remained largely agrarian and dependent on unprofitable slave labor. This would prove to be the difference in the outcome of the Civil War.
Sources:
Davis, Kenneth C.: Don't Know Much About the Civil War (New York: William Morrow and Company, Inc., 1996)
DiLorenzo, Thomas J.: The Real Lincoln (New York: Crown Publishing Group, 2002)
 |
 |
