Crittenden Compromise Essay Research Paper What Was

Crittenden Compromise Essay, Research Paper

What Was the Crittenden Compromise, Why Was It Written, and Why Did It Fail.

The Crittenden Compromise was more or less a last ditch effort to avert secession of the Southern states and the likely ensuing civil war. The mid-nineteenth century was a time when many people had their own views of slavery (the main cause of secession), and how Congress should handle it. Northern abolitionists wanted an end to slavery; however, southerners were opposed to such a drastic measure. In the midst of Senatorial confusion and congressional debate arose the Kentucky Senator, John Jordan Crittenden, with his proposal. Initially brought to the Senate floor on December 18, 1860, the compromise met with mixed reviews. Crittenden was willing to amend his compromise to suit his colleagues’ ideas, but it was not enough, and the proposal was ultimately unsuccessful because of a variety of reasons, leading to the deterioration of Southern unity and loyalty towards the Union.

During the 1850’s, the growing debate over slavery was nearing a definite boiling point. The controversy culminated with the election of Abraham Lincoln to Presidency in 1860. A major issue that was being tossed around during compromise talks was the 36.30′ line, established by the Missouri Compromise in 1820. This compromise said that Maine would be admitted to the Union as a free state as long as Missouri would be admitted as a slave state, and that the remainder of the Louisiana Purchase north of this line would be free, and south of it would be slave. The restoration of this line for the remaining territories, and also guaranteeing the protection of slavery south of this line were major components of the Crittenden Plan.

South Carolina was perhaps the most aggressive in their efforts for secession. They held strong beliefs that the North was deliberately trying to hurt Southern business and at the same time violating the laws of the Constitution. South Carolinians felt a number of states including Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Illinois (among others) were enacting laws that either negated acts of Congress or rendered attempts at executing them useless. The constitutional article in question is Article 4, which states:

No person held to service in one state, under the laws thereof, escaping into another shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up, on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due.

The South (especially South Carolina) was angry that too many of their slaves had escaped to the North and were being permitted to live free, despite Article 4. The South felt powerless to stop these actions and hence moved for secession, and eventually seceded on December 20, 1860. Charles O’Conor, a prominent lawyer in the South, stated:

…If the South cannot otherwise protect itself against the aggravated spirit of the North, a real necessity for this act is secession…[from the] people of the North, who have drunk into their bosoms their dreadful error to crush out and trample this system of slavery…

A little more than two months later, Alabama, Missouri, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, and Texas all followed in South Carolina’s footsteps and seceded by February 1, 1861. The growing anxieties and varying views on slavery put the nation’s unity to the test and gave rise to the need for compromise. Enter John Crittenden with his plan.

Crittenden’s plan included two congressional resolutions and five constitutional amendments (also called Articles), the first of which called for the extension of the Missouri Compromise (36.30′) line to the Pacific Ocean so that it would include all territories then part of the United States or “hereafter acquired.” All land north of the line would be considered free and all land south would be slave; also, any land later acquired south of the line would be up to the territory to decide. This measure was designed to try and balance the number of free and slave states in the Union.

The second article in the proposal called for the stripping of any Congressional power to abolish slavery. It stated, “Congress shall have no power to abolish slavery in places under its exclusive jurisdiction, and situate within the limits of States that permit the holding of slaves.” This was an important amendment because it promoted the idea of popular sovereignty in such a way that Congress cannot abolish slavery in states that allow it, thereby leaving the issue in the states’ hands to decide for themselves.

Article Four of Crittenden’s Compromise ensured slaveholders the right to transport slaves from one slave state or territory to another: “Congress shall have no power to prohibit…the transportation of slaves from one state to another, or to a territory, in which slaves are permitted.” This amendment was especially beneficial to the South because there had long been a debate over whether slaves were personal property or not. The Constitution guarantees a citizen the right to transport personal property as he or she wishes. This article suggested that a slave was in fact personal property and thus guaranteed owners of their right to transport them.

The fifth article states: “…Congress shall have power to provide by law…that the United State