Louisiana Purchase Analysis

871 Words4 Pages
In the early years of the republic, there were various controversial issues that divided the American people. The ratification of the Constitution split people up into Federalist and Anti-Federalist groups, which were those who wanted the Constitution to be ratified, and those that didn’t. Before the Louisiana Purchase, people were also split on whether or not the purchase was going to be worth it in the long run. When the issue of expansion of slavery into the territories was brought up, Southern-extremest and Northern-soilers could never seem to come to an agreement. Before the Constitution, there were the Articles of Confederation. These Articles were very focused on diminishing the power of the federal government. While the government had the ability to create laws and suggest that taxes be paid, they had no power to enforce the…show more content…
Some people who were moving into the West wanted to bring their slaves with them, but there were others that wanted the territories to remain without slaves. The country at this time was pretty equally divided when it came to free-states and slave-states, so it was difficult to come to a resolution that pleases the majority of the country. One solution that was proposed was to extend the Missouri Compromise line all the way to the pacific. The other two were to either allow the people of the territories decide when applying, or to bring the issue to the Supreme Court. Neither side felt that these solutions were sufficient. The Southern slave owners believed that if they were not allowed to bring their slaves into the new territory, then they were at a major disadvantage. They would basically be denied the right to bring their property with them while moving, and this could discourage many slave owners from moving their in the first place. They then feared that if mostly non-slave owners migrated west, the influence in Congress would become unbalanced once

More about Louisiana Purchase Analysis

Open Document