1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
vivado [14]
3 years ago
15

Consider the arguments over the expansion of slavery made by both northerners and southerners in the aftermath of the U.S. victo

ry over Mexico. Who had the more compelling case? Or did each side make equally significant arguments?
History
2 answers:
Sedaia [141]3 years ago
4 0

Answer:

The election of 1848 did nothing to quell the controversy over whether slavery would advance into the Mexican Cession. Some slaveholders, like President Taylor, considered the question a moot point because the lands acquired from Mexico were far too dry for growing cotton and therefore, they thought, no slaveholder would want to move there. Other southerners, however, argued that the question was not whether slaveholders would want to move to the lands of the Mexican Cession, but whether they could and still retain control of their slave property. Denying them the right to freely relocate with their lawful property was, they maintained, unfair and unconstitutional. Northerners argued, just as fervidly, that because Mexico had abolished slavery, no slaves currently lived in the Mexican Cession, and to introduce slavery there would extend it to a new territory, thus furthering the institution and giving the Slave Power more control over the United States. The strong current of antislavery sentiment—that is, the desire to protect white labor—only increased the opposition to the expansion of slavery into the West.

Explanation:

Hope this helps!!!

sesenic [268]3 years ago
4 0

The correct answer to this open question is the following.

In those years, the struggle of Northerns and Southerns relied on the control of Congress. Neither side wanted to give up positions and that is why the decision of admitting Texas to the Union was so important. It would be redundant to say that Southern states wanted Texas to enter as a slave state and Northerners wanted it to enter as a nonslave state. For instance, the Wilmot Proviso by David Wilmot (Congressmen from Pennsylvania) prohibited slavery in the new region. Then it came the Compromise of 1850 that admitted California as a free state. And problems, differences and argues increased.

Texas would finally be admitted as a slave state. The Republic of Texas existed from 1836 to 1845 before Texas joined the United States. Besides the likelihood of war with México, annexation took so long because Texas would be admitted as a slave state and all the debated that it generated between the North and the South. Texas was admitted to the Union as a slave state on December 29, 1845.

You might be interested in
Was Lenin a hero who made life better for Russians or was he a villain who made it worse?
garik1379 [7]

Answer:

Let's consider Lenin, the man. The sheer authenticity of his passion cannot be doubted by anyone. He did not cynically exploit the Russian situation of 1917 to satisfy his lust for power. The revolution, which overthrew the Tsar and later installed the Communist regime, was not just a path to leadership for leadership's sake. Whatever anyone thinks of Lenin, we cannot deny his sincerity. He genuinely believed that Russia could achieve a Communist utopia, and that he would be the first step in the salvation of the nation.

Explanation:

6 0
3 years ago
Antifederalists were mostly wealthy planters, farmers, merchants, and lawyers. Please select the best answer from the choices pr
marusya05 [52]

F - While there were many prominent and wealthy Anti federalists, there was also a large number of ordinary American farmers.

5 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
25 POINTS! What did Mary Todd Lincoln repeatedly ask while her husband was dying?
Usimov [2.4K]

“We will visit the Holy Land, and see those places hallowed by the footsteps of the Savior. There is no city on earth I so much desire to see as Jerusalem.”

3 0
3 years ago
Why cant yall just give me the aswers
makkiz [27]

Answer:

to what

Explanation:

???????????????????

7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Which statement best describes the historical significance of the Declaration of Independence?
Alexxandr [17]
It describes why the colonists wanted to be free from Britain and what led to their decision to fight against British rule.
5 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • A, B, C, or D help please
    6·2 answers
  • What is the answer???
    15·1 answer
  • Select the statement that is not true of Champlain:
    15·2 answers
  • Which two ancient civilizations did the European’s focus on during the renaissance
    13·1 answer
  • What did the woman of America fight for the most
    12·1 answer
  • From your Bible reading assignment:
    6·1 answer
  • ㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤ
    11·2 answers
  • What was the primary purpose of southern implementation of black codes
    5·1 answer
  • How did the New England and middle colonies help the southern colonies?
    5·1 answer
  • 3. what two strategies did minority actors use in early media in order to
    5·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!