The Missouri Compromise of 1820
The Compromise of 1850
Compromises Map Activity: Teacher Guide
Missouri Compromise 1820
Background Info
In 1812, the "Lower Louisiana" was admitted to the Union as a state, "Upper Louisiana" was organized into the Missouri
Territory. By 1818, Missouri had reached the point that its citizens petitioned for admission themselves. Since the institution
of slavery had been an established element in Missouri since French colonial times, this would have created a situation where
the U.S. Senate would have a majority of Southern slaveholding states. That prospect was extremely unwelcome in the North.
Many in the north felt that the federal government should not allow slavery in its new territories and should move along a
path to eventually destroy it.
Later in the year, Maine held a convention and requested admission as a "free" state. The Great Compromiser, Henry Clay,
proposed the following elements of a sectional compromise:



That Missouri be admitted to the Union as a slave state (as the population of the territory apparently desired).
That slavery was to be prohibited from the new American territories in the Louisiana Purchase north of 36?30’ north
latitude (the southern boundary of Missouri). States to the south of the line (the new Arkansas Territory) would
decide the slavery issue for themselves.
That Maine (formerly part of Massachusetts) be admitted to the Union as a free state.
Sectional balance was maintained - with the admission of Missouri and Maine there were 12 free states and 12 slave states.
This established a precedent that would be followed for the next 30 years. New states would be admitted in tandem—one
slave, one free.
Activity
1. Color/shade each of the following (and make a key)
a. Free states and territories
b. Slave states and territories
c. Area closed to slavery
d. Area open to slavery
Questions
1. Which region had the most land area in 1820?
2. What changes did the Missouri Compromise bring to the US map?
3. What territory was open to slavery? What territory was kept free of slavery?
4. What did the South stand to gain as a result of the Compromise? What did they stand to lose?
5. Could either side be considered the winner in this compromise? Why/why not?
The Compromise of 1850 (Great Compromise)
Background Info
When Zachary Taylor assumed office in early 1849, the question of the extension of slavery into former Mexican lands was
becoming critical. The immediate pressure point was California, whose population mushroomed during the Gold Rush.
Enthusiastic Californians petitioned for admission to the Union as a free state, thus laying down a challenge to the existing
sectional balance of 15 free states and 15 slave states. (Speeches by Henry Clay, John C. Calhoun, Daniel Webster)
Just four more days passed before yet another important speech was delivered, this time by William H. Seward. Seward
expressed the position of abolitionists, and declared that there was a "higher law than the Constitution," which should
militate against any compromise with slavery. (Zachary Taylor dies, Millard Fillmore in office)
The compromise balanced sectional interests by enacting the following:
1. California was admitted to the Union as a free state.
2. The New Mexico and Utah territories were to decide the question issue by relying on “popular sovereignty,” allowing
the actual settlers to vote on the issue.
3. Texas lost the New Mexico territory, but received $10 million from the federal government for its loss.
4. The slave trade in the District of Columbia was abolished.
5. A new Fugitive Slave Act was passed.
Activity
1. Shade/color each differently (and make a key)
a. Two territories allowed to become slave states through popular sovereignty and territories open to
slavery through popular sovereignty
b. Territory set aside for American Indians
c. Territory divided at 49th parallel with Britain
d. Free states/territories
e. Slave states/territories
2. Draw a solid line to show the (old) Missouri Compromise line
Questions
1. Why wasn’t the Missouri Compromise effective?
2. What did the South stand to gain as a result of the Compromise? What did they stand to lose?
3. What did the North stand to gain as a result of the Compromise? What did they stand to lose
4. Could either side be considered the winner in this compromise? Why/why not?