My history schoolbooks taught me that Missouri couldn't be admitted to the Union unless it was paired with a free state, so as a compromise Maine was split off from Massachusetts.
I realize that, as with many claims in high school history books, this claim might not be entirely accurate. Congress may have wanted to split Maine off anyway, for entirely different reasons. The balance between free states and slave states may have not been all that important and was abandoned anyway in the 1850s.
But supposing it was decided to not split Maine off and just wait until the next western territory without slavery came in, and telling the Missourians to wait until then.
As it happens, Wikipedia has a page for entry dates of states into the Union and gives the following information for post-1820 admissions:
Maine 1820 (free)
Missouri 1821 (slave)
Arkansas 1836 (slave)
Michigan 1837 (free)
Florida 1845 (slave)
Texas 1845 (slave)
Iowa 1846 (free)
Wisconsin 1848 (free)
California 1850 (free) not paired
So to keep the balance, Missouri would have had to wait until 1836 to be paired with Michigan. Arkansas then would have waited until 1845-50, coming in along with Texas, Florida, California, Iowa, and Wisconsin. The admission of California as a free state then would not have upset the balance.
This means a completely different 1850 compromise as well. What would have been the other ramifications of handling things this way?
Maine might have wound up becoming a state during the Civil War, assuming that is not butterflied away, to boost Lincoln's re-election chances. The Republicans were doing all sorts of gerrymandering with state admissions (Nevada, West Virginia, the two Dakotas) during the later nineteenth century.
I realize that, as with many claims in high school history books, this claim might not be entirely accurate. Congress may have wanted to split Maine off anyway, for entirely different reasons. The balance between free states and slave states may have not been all that important and was abandoned anyway in the 1850s.
But supposing it was decided to not split Maine off and just wait until the next western territory without slavery came in, and telling the Missourians to wait until then.
As it happens, Wikipedia has a page for entry dates of states into the Union and gives the following information for post-1820 admissions:
Maine 1820 (free)
Missouri 1821 (slave)
Arkansas 1836 (slave)
Michigan 1837 (free)
Florida 1845 (slave)
Texas 1845 (slave)
Iowa 1846 (free)
Wisconsin 1848 (free)
California 1850 (free) not paired
So to keep the balance, Missouri would have had to wait until 1836 to be paired with Michigan. Arkansas then would have waited until 1845-50, coming in along with Texas, Florida, California, Iowa, and Wisconsin. The admission of California as a free state then would not have upset the balance.
This means a completely different 1850 compromise as well. What would have been the other ramifications of handling things this way?
Maine might have wound up becoming a state during the Civil War, assuming that is not butterflied away, to boost Lincoln's re-election chances. The Republicans were doing all sorts of gerrymandering with state admissions (Nevada, West Virginia, the two Dakotas) during the later nineteenth century.
