MIssouri Compromise, Compromise of 1850, Kansas Nebraska Act

Compromise such as Kansas Nebraska Act and Compromise of 1850 demonstrated ineffectiveness of consoling both north and south, they would further aggravate the issue of slavery and tended to shatter Union more than help it. The Kansas-Nebraska Act designed to use popular sovereignty to determine the slavery status of the Kansas and Nebraska Territores. Anti-salvery northerners were angered by what they condemned as an act of bad faith by the “Nebrascal” and their “Nebrascality” because they viewed the Missouri Compromise as sacred as the constitution itself. Passing of such a act would repealed the line of 36-30. Impulsively and recklessly northerner formed the Republican Party whose main platform was a fierce opposition to the slavery in the western territories, which would make any future compromise south immeasurably more difficult. So instead trying to reduce conflict by determining a way to possibly end slavery, the Kensas-Nebraska did the exact opposite. The Compromise of 1850 also was a major point between the North and South. Due to the increasing number of runaway slaves, the south wanted a new and stricter fugitive slave law to be enacted by Congress. The new fugitive slave law proclaim that runaway were to be denied a jury trial and could not testify in court. This act made abolitionist all more resolved to put an end to slavery. The Underground Railroad became more active, reaching its peak between 1850 and 1860. The southerner in turn were embittered because the northerner would not in good faith execute the law-the only real and immediate southern ‘gain from the compromise. On some extent though Compromise increased the intense sectionalism play off in politics, it also added the immensely to the moral strength of North to its will fight for the union.The Missouri Compromise tended to preserve the union as both of the union could be satisfied, even id only temporarily. In 1818, as the Missouri Territory applied for the statehood, many of the Missourians wanted to allow slavering in their state. Faced with the north opposition, the congress came upon the Missouri Compromise in 1820 tended to preserve the balance of free state and salve states in Senate. It made any state below the 336-30 line was allowed to have slaves while anywhere above the line slavery was prohibited. Neither north and south was acutely displeased on such a concession, but the compromise only ducked on question of slavery, eventually it did not resolve it.