The Missouri Compromise: Regional Differences Toward Slavery

Era of Good Feelings 1. The fact that the two-party system appeared to be on the wane during this time is considered an important factor contributing to the Era of Good Feeling. Do you think the two-party system today prevents a national spirit of optimism and cooperation? Why or why not? Cite examples from history and/or current events to support your view.
I think the two-party system does prevent a national spirit of optimism and cooperation. This is because if there are two parties, there are likely two opposing views, evident in the two parties we have in America today. Many times, Republicans won’t vote for a bill the Democratic party proposes solely based on the fact that their opposing party proposed it. Members of the House and Senate
This line was a breaking point by prohibiting slavery in the area north of the line, except for the area within the boundaries of the proposed state of Missouri. By doing so, slavery could not spread into new areas, and would only stay within the area south of the 36-30 latitude line and the proposed boundaries of Missouri.

Analyze: How did the Missouri Compromise reflect regional differences toward slavery?
The Missouri Compromise reflected regional differences toward slavery in that the North and South had opposite opinions about the issue. The North was against using slaves while the South was for it. The 36-30 latitude line essentially divided the country between North and South, as the area above the line prohibited slavery, which they were fine with anyways as the North didn’t use and was against using slaves. The area below the line and Missouri were allowed to use slaves, which made sense as the area below the line was the South, who actually used the slaves and didn’t want to end the use of the slave system. This 36-30 latitude line was a physical reflection of the differing viewpoints on slavery between the North and the South, as it reflected the ideals of the North and
Should this occur, the British or French would control American commerce from Cuba as a vantage point. Since the commerce from the Mississippi Valley and the Gulf area was equal, in value, to all of America’s foreign trade, this would cause a huge problem for the United States and greatly threatened the economy of the country since the United States developed a profitable trade with Latin America that rivaled Great Britain as the principal trading nation in the area. Many Americans believed the success of anti-Spanish revolutions would also strengthen America’s role in Latin America. During the war between Spain and the colonies in Latin America, the U.S. said they were neutral, but they sold ships and supplies to the revolutionaries which shows that they weren’t actually neutral and was actually trying to help the rebelling colonies. As a result, President Monroe established diplomatic relations with Argentina, Chile, Peru, Colombia, and Mexico and became the first country to recognize them. In 1823, Monroe went even further and created the Monroe Doctrine, which emerged directly out of America’s relations with Europe. In the 1820s, a lot of Americans were afraid that Spain’s European allies, specifically France, would help Spain retake the empire they lost in Latin America. Many Americans also feared that Great Britain had designs on Cuba but John Adams, who helped create the