<p>border states.. need a confirmation</p>
<p>missouri compromise.. confirmation</p>
<p>confirmed: turner is the frontier thesis</p>
<p>Wasn't it b/c Kansas Nebraska Act repealed it? When the Missouri Compromise was first conceived, it was meant to eliminate slavery above the 36 30 line.</p>
<p>yeah MtL07, i remember something about that</p>
<p>wat was the border state question?</p>
<p>Confirmation Answer to "Border States": strategic location/supply</p>
<p>about the dred scott one...</p>
<p>Did anyone notice it said "African Americans" could not sue in court...</p>
<p>because that's what killed me because I thought free blacks could, but since everythign else was definitely wrong, I just went with that.</p>
<p>border states im pretty sure it was because they were beneficial to the union or something...dont remember exactly</p>
<p>the Missouri compromise was about Maine getting admitted as a free state and Missouri being admitted as a Slave state, it was about keeping the South happy, hence it delayed conflict</p>
<p>definitely delayed conflict</p>
<p>But it also drew the line to keep slavery in the south.</p>
<p>but it didn't work!</p>
<p>well if somone can remember the EXACT question this can be solved lol</p>
<p>it's one question...wouldnt worry about it too much</p>
<p>Actually, you guys are right (those supporting "delay conflict)</p>
<p>From wikipedia:
"It prohibited slavery north of the 36° 30' border of the Arkansas territory (excluding Missouri)."</p>
<p>There, end of discussion for that problem.</p>
<p>'twas a tough one</p>
<p>for the Canada one.. i put lack of colonists</p>
<p>Yea but the reason it's called the missouri COMPROMISE is because they were keeping the south happy, they were going to not let them have any more slave states, I'm 99% sure I'm right</p>
<p>Yesssss^^^^^</p>
<p>Edit: meant to comment on the "lack of colonist one"</p>
<p>here is a new one, the picture about slavery after the war....</p>
<p>yes that dedinetely delayedf conflict now can we move on to other questions?</p>