Nationalism+and+Sectionalism

media type="custom" key="8980896"

Notes on the Missouri Compromise:  - Maine = Free state.  - Missouri = Slave state.  - On the 36-30 Latitude, excluding Missouri slavery was prohibited.  - This was a compromise because North was afraid of shift in power.  - The area was large and was going to require a large amount of senators = throw off in House of Representatives.  - 5th Amendment makes it unconstitutional.  - 3/5ths Compromise backs it up.

 Outline for the Essay :  - Under the 3/5ths compromise, it was an agreement between southern and northern states, stating that 3/5ths of the population would be considered as slaves.  -slaves were viewed as property. - In order for the government to obtain property -> Buy slaves. - The 5th Amendment states, " nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”  - In order for Missouri Compromise to be constitutional, the government would have to pay the owner of every slave.  - The government however DID NOT.  - Violates the 5th amendment. <span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive;"> - Amendment = part of constitution. <span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive;"> - Therefore, Missouri Compromise = UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

<span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive; font-size: 120%;">ESSAY: <span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive;">__The Missouri Compromise__ <span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive;">The Missouri compromise was an agreement passed in 1820, which set Maine as a Free State, and Missouri as a slave state. Missouri wanted to become a free state, however, Missouri was a larger state which made northern states fear that they would end up with lesser amounts of senators in the House of Representatives, and cause a shift in power. To solve this problem, the senate decided that to balance it out, they would have to establish a free state. The events that took place in the balancing of power, lead to the agreement that the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional. <span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive;">In the 1820’s, slaves were considered as property. Therefore, those who owned those slaves technically owned them as property. Under the 3/5ths compromise, it was an agreement between southern and northern states, stating that 3/5ths of the population would be considered as slaves. If three fifths of a population were considered as slaves which would mean that about 60% of people were viewed as property. Therefore for the government to step in and free a state, they would be technically freeing those under the Free State, including the slaves, who were viewed as property. However, under the 5th Amendment, it clearly says that “nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” This means that if the government freed a state, they would only be able to pay for it in order to allow it to be free. <span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive;">The Fifth Amendment was another factor that proves that the Missouri compromise was unconstitutional. The Fifth Amendment is one of the many amendments in our constitution that protects our rights. In the Fifth Amendment an important line is stated, “nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” In the Missouri Compromise, slaves were considered as property, Missouri became a slave state, and Maine became a free state. When a state becomes free, then everything in the state becomes free, even property. Because slaves were considered as property, then if the government set Maine as free so would the slaves. However, if the government were to do this, they would have to pay those who owned this property just as it states in the Fifth Amendment. But, the government did not pay those who they took property from, which violates the Fifth Amendment because they are depriving the people of their property, without paying them. If the Missouri Compromise violates one of the amendments in the constitution, then it’s unconstitutional. The Missouri Compromise violated the 5th Amendment making it unconstitutional. <span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive;">The Missouri Compromise was an unconstitutional agreement passed in 1820. Because Missouri strived to become a state, the Northern states worried that they would lose senators in the House of Representatives, and cause a shift in power. Their solution was to allow Maine to become a Free State, and Missouri to become a slave state. However, this solution actually caused the Missouri Compromise to be unconstitutional. Freeing Maine would mean that the slaves that belonged to others and were considered as property were freed too. In order for the government to do this, under the 5th Amendment it states that they government would have to pay for all of the property that It was taking from those who owned it. However, the government neglected this, making the Missouri Compromise a violation to the 5th Amendment, which makes it unconstitutional.