What is a reason that the Missouri compromise did not have lasting effects?

Question

What is a reason that the Missouri compromise did not have lasting effects?

a) it only applied to the lands of the Louisiana purchase.
b) it only applied to the lands of the Mexican cession.
c) it relied on popular sovereignty.
d) it limited the number of states that could be admitted per year.

Answer 1

The reason that the Missouri Compromise did not have lasting effects is d) it limited the number of states that could be admitted per year. While the Missouri Compromise successfully resolved the issue of slave versus free state balance in the newly acquired western territories at the time, the provision that limited the number of states that could be admitted per year was eventually deemed as impractical and ineffective. This provision was later repealed with the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Act in 1854, which further escalated tensions between the North and the South leading up to the American Civil War.

Answer 2

Which of the following laws would the Free-Soil Party have supported?

a) cottonocracy
b) slave codes
c) Wilmot proviso
d) Fugitive Slave Act

Answer 3

The Free-Soil Party would have supported c) Wilmot Proviso. The Wilmot Proviso was a proposed law in 1846 that sought to prohibit slavery in any territories acquired from Mexico as a result of the Mexican-American War. The Free-Soil Party was formed with the goal of opposing the expansion of slavery into these territories, and therefore would have supported the Wilmot Proviso. The party believed in the restriction of slavery in new territories to protect the interests of free white labor.