Question

Why did the Fugitive Slave Act anger Northerners? a) It contradicted the Missouri Compromise. b) It increased federal intervention in the affairs of independent states. c)It contradicted the Wilmot Proviso. d) It prioritized states rights over the rights of the federal government.

Answer 1

The answer is b) It increased federal intervention in the affairs of independent states.

By the time these federal Acts were enacted in the U.S., several Northern states had already abolished slavery but it was legal in the Southern states. The Fugitive Slave Acts of 1793 and 1850 allowed for the capture and return of runaway slaves within the territory of the United States, aiming to prevent that the Northern states would become safe havens for runaway slaves.

The last act was more rigid in their provision and stated more regulation, including the guarantee of harsher punishments for anyone interfering in runaways slave's capture, the right of slave owners and their “agents” to search for escaped slaves within the borders of free states and compelled citizens to assist in their capture as well. It also denied slaves the right to a jury trial, among others.

The Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 implied much government's intervention in the state's affairs, and this angered most northern states. They responded by intentionally neglecting the law or creating acts that nullified or that protected black people, the so-called "personal liberty laws", and by making great efforts to assist runaway slaves, among others.

Answer 2

It increased federal intervention in the affairs of independent states.

The Fugitive Slave Act could be called as a compromise on Humanity, referring to the highly condemning provisions that were constituted within the Act. This Act was constituted at a highly critical political fiasco, that emerged as a conflict between the Northern abolitionist states, and the Southern States, which favored the continuation of slavery. This period is of great historical importance as it also determined the relations between the Federal Government and the states. The Federal Government was dominated by representatives from Free States, and they wanted to achieve complete abolition even through constant intervention in state affairs. The institution of slavery was degradable to humanity, but the economy necessitated its existence. The Federal Government attempted to control and regulate the instability that occurred due to a number of slaves fleeing the oppression of the Northern States.  

Further Explanation-

The free Northern States were severely opposed to this Act, as they believed that through this negotiation, the Federal Government was compromising on its powers and granting the regional governments a free hand to determine the fate of slaves who were bound in oppression. However, this meant that the States required the Federal Government to be commitant with any proposal that was related to the issue of slavery. Given that the Northern states had an economy that did not require the use of slavery, they called for the total abolition of the institution of slavery. The Free states refused to aid in the manhunt for escaped slaves, condemning the Act, and even using all of the state machinery and institutions to protect the slaves from being found and getting them returned to their lives of oppression.  

Learn more:

1. According to the constitution, the judicial branch of the federal government is headed by

brainly.com/question/10065176

2. He powers of the commander in chief of the armed forces belong to the

brainly.com/question/9881795

Answer Details-

Grade- High School

Chapter-   The build-up to the American Civil War.

Subject- History.

Keywords-

Slavery, opposition, free states, economy, Fugitive slave, instability, oppression, manhunt, the abolition of slavery.