Missouri Compromise - Term Paper Example

Due Missouri Compromise It is undeniable that the founding fathers of the United s of America as a nation upheld many ideals concerning inalienable rights of man, yet this was a fact that was not applicable to every citizen within its boarders. Even though the country came out strongly to oppose slavery   in the beginning of the 19th century, its history is punctuated with dirty events characterizing gross violation of fundamental human rights; freedom of choice in particular. The US was a diehard participant in slavery, more so of the African. Just a few years off the hook of colonialism, Americans had a lot in the plate to deal with for the young nation to progress to maturity. The period 1813 to 1820, an Era in which good things were just beginning to trickle down; an oftentimes referred to as the “Era of Good Feelings”; the Missouri compromise, an event that is believed to have had a major role in shaping the course of American history struck. As a matter of fact, even the colonists before the birth of the nation had been listening to their consciences, and knew in their minds that slavery was indeed, wrong. Thus, it was time to take note and recognize how cruel the vice actually was. Finally, in 1820, a minority of congressmen rose up and took an expressive stand. However small, important steps had to be made toward attainment of equal rights. The events preceding the compromise came at a time when James Monroe had taken office as the president of the new Republic with only one political faction inexistence, that being the Democratic-Republicans. Although there were a number of diverse issues to be tackled ranging from Taxation dilemmas to particular internal improvements that sprung from the Federalists ideals; a precise balance within the Senate of Congress equating the number of representative for free and slave states was regarded important in terms of house voting, and was to be upheld no matter the prevailing circumstances. Holding other factors such as the supply of cheap land constant, because freedom had to be sought anyway, Missouri soon applied for recognition as full fledged member of the union as a slave state. Given that Missouri was situated above Ohio River, a region that most Americans generally regarded as the North with Free states, the arrival of Missouri application for statehood as a slave state sent shivers of panic across the North and a fierce debate in Congress ensued. Indeed, as most scholars agree, the Missouri case was a recipe that came close to thrusting America into Civil War prematurely over slavery due the balance that was just about to be offset. The issue at hand was to be solved fast with both sides being accounted for; a real threat of imminent collapse of the nation as a whole was just beckoning not far away. Despite a chorus of warnings beginning with the Farewell message address by George Washington against sectionalism; a clear indication that a definite line had long been drawn ever since the formation of the United State of America as an independent state towards this issue, America was just insensitive to the plight of the oppressed. The speeches of the 16th congress articulately upheld strong positions with both the north and south showing no signs of letting go. The North, as status would reveal, was indeed the manufacturing powerhouse of the entire country, while the South was predominantly agriculture oriented. Therefore, large tracks of plantations were commonplace in the South. Essentially, with the level of technology still at its infancy stages, running these plantations required a huge free work force, and slaves were of course the best bet. At the back of everybody’s mind were the contents of the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 outlawing slavery within the boarders of United States, a status purged after the acceptance of Louisiana’s membership into the union. Once again, slavery, a vice the founding fathers-Hamilton and Madison worked hard to get rid of in America, forced its way into the politics of the country. Evidently, the attitudes of both northerners as well as southerners were not completely pro-slavery, neither were they totally against the vice. As was everyone guesses, the Missouri debates brought the country into an era of widening rifts pitting the North and South with the core issues of contention being the old, stale factor; slavery. Against a backdrop of offensive onslaughts from the North towards slavery, the South was not just about to barge in their defense. A proponent of the natural rights theory, Thomas Jefferson had long warned that slavery was indeed inhuman, and so had this to say to obstructers of freedom, "Slavery is indeed a cruel war against human nature itself violating the most sacred rights of life and liberty in persons of a distant land……. the problem will burst on us like a tornado " (Wilentz 384). Jefferson even went ahead describing his fears of the raging debate likening it with“ a fire bell in the night, awakened to filled me (Jefferson) with terror" for the simple reason that it opened up the flood gate of moral verses economic aspects of slavery at a time when Missouri possessed a slave-owning population of over 10,000 (16 percent of the country’s total) and was still in need of more slaves given the vastness of cotton plantations. Slave owning was fast spreading across the Mississippi river up from Alabama, Arkansas and Louisiana. Apparently, those in Missouri could not just allow this economic opportunity, which other agricultural states within south enjoyed, slip away (Wilentz 377). That far, the division was apparent more so in the crucial legislative body, the Congress. The bill proposing Missouri membership intentions actually passed in the House of Representatives where northern congressmen had the majority of votes but failed to go through the senate. A common ground had to be sought. In 1820, an agreement put forward by Henry Clay to the Congress was adopted paving the way for Missouri to join the Union as a slave state. To maintain the balance in the senate vote process, Maine was cleared to enter the Union at that time as a free state. In addition, the Compromise drew an imaginary line 36 Degrees 30 Minutes North Latitude, separating the new Louisiana into two regions, north and south. Regions at the north of the above mentioned line were free territories. In effect, African-Americans in these areas were officially free citizens. Strangely as it may be seem, the Compromise encouraged people from the free north to return escapee slaves to the south. The agreement also fell short of prohibiting slavery in the free territories. As time would later tell, this compromise did not solve any sort of problem but actually postponed it into a bigger circus. Despite the warnings, the Missouri Compromise would be another attempt to once again silence the emotive issue and sweep the dirt under the carpet so to speak. This compromise lasted for only 34 years. As correctly predicted by Thomas Jefferson, his prophecy came to pass with the outbreak of the Civil War. As if his description of slavery as a "cruel war against humanity” was not enough, Thomas Jefferson actually wrote a letter to John Holmes regarding the precarious situation of sectionalism presented by the Missouri Compromise stating that, “….No man on earth would sacrifice more than I (Jefferson) would to relieve us from this heavy reproach, in a practical way" (Wilentz 379). Indeed, as would be expected of a true patriot, Jefferson did his best to relieve his country of the looming crisis that lay before their very eyes. Any other rational being would concur with his sentiments that slavery, an old stinking problem, would one day break the road blocks and endanger the very union they were working hard to preserve. Kudos to statesmanship showed by Thomas Jefferson. He was, for a fact, a man with great foresight that his colleagues never bought into. Jefferson thoughts concerning slavery were not any different from those of James Madison. Although he owned slaves, Madison was aware of the evil that lies in slavery and as such subscribed to the thoughts of “equality of men and the unalienable rights of Life, Liberty, alongside the Pursuit of Happiness” (Kramnick, and Lowi 152; Howe 21). Indeed, no human life is lesser than that of his neighbor; a struggle that set the united states as a pillar for the protection of human rights allover the world. Wall Street Crash of 1929 Apart from the postwar recession that lasted for a few years, the aftermath of World War I (early 1920s) experienced a period of stability and prosperity that many observers have come full cycle to believe was extraordinary. Seven years preceding the crash in 1929, annual GNP growth rate and unemployment stood at an average of 4.7 and d 3.7 percent respectively (Klein 76). Taking advantage of new technologies, commercial as well as industrial enterprises did phenomenally well, a growth rate that was distributed across the economy. Coordinated by the emergence of modern management systems, efficient vertically-integrated enterprises were more able to captured economies of scale and scope through sufficiently maximized production (Galbraith 4). Indeed, the financial needs of new ventures completely altered the face of American capital markets. With restrictions on commercial banks long-term lending capability, firms had a window of financing investments through retained earnings and issuance of securities. The industrial securities market that emerged in the 1880s was considered fully matured in the 1920s. From old to new investments, all issued equities to finance their growth prospects. In a sense, America was really experiencing a very good time in the early twenties. High and rising production capability and employment; stable wages within the error of forecast margins; stable prices, this was indeed an era to live. In as much as many were still under the poverty line, more people had crossed over the line in this period than any other period ever witnessed before. If one was not rich, then at least he of she was comfortably well-off or well to do than ever before. American capitalism was indisputably witnessing a lively phase in history. Just to mention, there was a marginal increase in the number of manufacturing establishments to 206,700 up from 183, 9000 between the years 1925 and 1929, with an estimated output value of $68.0 billions up from $60.8 respectively. Industrial production index, according to the Federal Reserve estimates had risen from 67 percent in 1921, to 100 percent between the years 1923-25, and to 110 percent and 126 percent in July 1928 and June 1929 in that order (Galbraith 2). The roaring economic climate created “irrational exuberance” and excess speculative activities. The new fangled technologies such as the radio (RCA); the motor vehicle innovations (taken up by Ford’s mass production) in addition to speculative activities in real estate , especially the Ponzi Scheme in Florida, combined forces to create an “atmosphere of get rich fast.” Was this not what the Jeffersonian and Madison’s principles advocated for; equal rights between men, which according to Jefferson was an “unalienable right” (Kramnick, and Lowi 152). And the pursuit of happiness could be achieved even at the cost of destroying the economy. Would Jefferson have allowed this disaster to escalate to this level? No. For seven years, the Stock Market was a safe and easy avenue of money making. With steady rising share prices, many heavily invested in the stock exchange. A first in American investment history, American investors in large numbers were permitted to borrow on the margin to invest in the bourse. Fueled by speculative aspects of the stock exchange, Industrial production was rising at unsustainable rate with economic growth. Unknown to many was the fact that production capability and the national GDP were rising at a slower pace than the bourse. With jazz raging in the air, clubs in the major cities were cashing in on a godsend opportunity. In general, life was good in America. Stock prices ran up to excessively high levels. On 24 October 1929, the market downward slide began, with a total of 13 million shares changing hands that single day, setting an all time record ever witnessed NYSE trading history. A sign of a bombshell was here under the watch of everyone. Just a month earlier, the Dow had reached an all-time high the 381.17 mark. Attempts by chief bankers to save the stock market from complete collapse never bore any fruit. Spurred on by off-putting newspaper reports of Thursdays crash, more and more stocks were traded come Monday the 28th sending the Dow into a new tailspin. The following morning, often referred to as the “Black Tuesday,” rumors that President Herbert Hoover, being an ardent liberalist, would not veto the pending tariff bill further led to more crashes in stock prices. Following the Enlightenment ideals of liberalism that his predecessors Hamilton, Jefferson and Madison actually adhered to, and so the wall street crashed under the watch of President Herbert Hoover failing to a thing to save his country from the economic turmoil that was to last for two decades. When the bourse finally closed, a total of 9,212,800 shares had changed hands with massive losses (Galbraith 5). News that NYSE had actually collapsed came as a great shock to many. Their hopes, dreams had all gone up in smoke. While none can predict the future with certainty, it is safe to assume that a possible disaster can happen. History is also a good teacher, and would have been used to avoid the disaster that just miles away. A man with great foresight, Jefferson had a strong perception of privileges that could cause social trouble, and so would have acted given that such a scenario had occurred five decades preceding the crisis. Having pioneered financial prudence in America’s financial system, Hamilton would have acted early enough. Work cited Galbraith, John Kenneth. The Great Crash, 1929. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1954. Print. Howe, Daniel Walker. "Missouri, Slave Or Free?" American Heritage. 60.2 (Summer 2010): 21- 23. Print. Klein, Maury. Rainbows End: The Crash of 1929. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001. Print. Kramnick, Isaac and Theodore J. Lowi, eds. American Political Thought: A Norton Anthology. New York: W.W. Norton, 2009. Print. Wilentz, Sean. "Jeffersonian Democracy and the Origins of Political Antislavery in the United States: The Missouri Crisis Revisited." Journal of the Historical Society 4.3 (Sept 2004): 375-401. Read More