WI: No Missouri Compromise

You'll likely need something to keep things balanced, and it might be better if it's not geographical.

Personally I've wondered about a compromise that requires states to enter in pairs one free one slave.
 
You'll likely need something to keep things balanced, and it might be better if it's not geographical.

Personally I've wondered about a compromise that requires states to enter in pairs one free one slave.

I don't think most northern politicians would agree to it. It would be a step back form the Missouri Compromise, which allowed slavery in the territories south of the line, but did not guarantee that they would be entered as slave states in the future. Then again, if the South got more of an upper hand, maybe something like that could pass. But in general I don't think Congress liked passing laws that would legislate for the future like that.

Actually, now that I think about it, something like that seems very unlikely. A Congressional law mandating that states must enter in pairs of one free, one slave, would be an attempt at legislating for the future, as opposed to the Missouri Compromise, which settled the immediate question of whether slavery would be allowable in which territories and the status of slavery in Missouri. A congressional law is just that, a congressional law, not a constitutional amendment, and absolutely nothing would stop Congress from passing other laws contradicting it before it could have any effect on future entering states. So, I think Congress would see those flaws and would not pass a bill with no immediate effect on such a contentious subject.
 
Top