The Missouri Compromise was a significant agreement in the United States related to the issue of slavery in new territories. Here's a breakdown of the options provided:
a. The Missouri Compromise divided new lands into "slave" and "free" territories. This statement is accurate. The compromise, passed in 1820, established a line across the Louisiana Territory, stating that areas north of the line would be free states, and areas south would be slave states.
b. The statement that the Missouri Compromise satisfied both sides in the slavery debate is partly correct. While it temporarily eased tensions by balancing the number of free and slave states, it did not fully satisfy either side in the long term. It was seen as a temporary solution rather than a permanent resolution to the slavery issue.
c. The claim that the Missouri Compromise was forced on the South is not accurate. The compromise was a result of negotiations and agreements between Northern and Southern states in Congress, aiming to maintain a balance of power between slave and free states. It was not imposed solely on the South.
d. The statement that the Missouri Compromise was the result of the Dred Scott decision is incorrect. The Dred Scott decision, issued by the Supreme Court in 1857, ruled that African Americans, whether free or enslaved, were not American citizens and could not sue in federal court. This decision actually nullified the Missouri Compromise by declaring that Congress did not have the authority to prohibit slavery in the territories.
In conclusion, the Missouri Compromise did divide new lands into "slave" and "free" territories, providing a temporary solution to the slavery issue by setting boundaries for the expansion of slavery in the United States.
