Why did some Southerners argue that the North was given an advantage by the Missouri Compromise based on their interpretation of the map?
Some Southerners argued that the North was given an advantage by the Missouri Compromise based on their interpretation of the map because they believed that the compromise favored the North in terms of future representation in Congress. Here's how one can understand their perspective by looking at the map:
1. Begin by examining the basic context: The Missouri Compromise was passed in 1820, and it aimed to maintain a balance between free and slave states in the growing United States. Under the compromise, Missouri was admitted as a slave state, while Maine was admitted as a free state.
2. Consider the "line of latitude" concept: The compromise also stipulated that slavery would be prohibited in any new states formed north of the southern border of Missouri (36°30'N latitude).
3. Analyze the map: By examining a map of the United States, you can visualize how this compromise affected the distribution of potential future states. If you draw a horizontal line at 36°30'N latitude, you would see that this line mostly divided the Louisiana Purchase territory into two sections.
4. Take note of the potential consequences: The rationale behind this line was to ensure a balance of free and slave states. However, since the territories of the Louisiana Purchase were vast and mainly located north of 36°30'N, some Southerners argued that this provision gave the North an advantage in terms of gaining future free states.
5. Understand their interpretation: Southerners believed that most of the land suitable for agriculture, including cash crops like cotton, was located within the territory north of the 36°30'N line. Therefore, they claimed that the North would have more opportunities to establish new free states, potentially upsetting the balance in Congress, where representation was influenced by the number of states.
In summary, some Southerners argued that the Missouri Compromise gave the North an advantage based on their interpretation of the map. They believed that the provision prohibiting slavery in territories north of 36°30'N would result in more free states being admitted, which could lead to an imbalance in Congress. This perspective was fueled by the belief that the prime agricultural lands suitable for cash crops like cotton were mainly located north of the compromise line.