Export your learner materials as an interactive game, a webpage, or FAQ style cheatsheet.
Unsaved Work Found!
It looks like you have unsaved work from a previous session. Would you like to restore it?
Total Categories: 6
The Wilmot Proviso was initially proposed to ban slavery in territories acquired from Mexico.
Answer: True
The Wilmot Proviso was a legislative proposal intended to prohibit the institution of slavery in any territory that the United States might acquire from Mexico as a result of the ongoing Mexican-American War.
Congressman David Wilmot, who introduced the Proviso, hailed from Pennsylvania.
Answer: True
Congressman David Wilmot of Pennsylvania was responsible for introducing the Wilmot Proviso.
The annexation of Texas in 1845 was a direct precursor to the Mexican-American War and the subsequent debate over slavery in new territories.
Answer: True
After an earlier treaty attempt failed, the U.S. annexed the Republic of Texas via a joint resolution. This action directly led to the war with Mexico, and as the war progressed and territory was captured, the central political question became the status of slavery in any lands acquired from Mexico.
The Mexican-American War was unpopular in the North and more popular in the South due to its perceived connection to slavery expansion.
Answer: True
The war was perceived by many in the North as an expansionist effort by the South to gain more territory for the establishment of slave states, leading to widespread opposition in the North, while it was more popular in the South.
The language of the Wilmot Proviso was modeled after the Northwest Ordinance of 1787.
Answer: True
The language used in the Wilmot Proviso was modeled after the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, a foundational document that had previously prohibited slavery in territories organized under its authority.
Proviso Township in Illinois and Wilmot town in Wisconsin are named in commemoration of the Wilmot Proviso.
Answer: True
Proviso Township in Cook County, Illinois, and the town of Wilmot in Wisconsin are named in commemoration of the Wilmot Proviso.
David Wilmot's introduction of the Proviso was seen as a move to challenge the expansion of slavery within the Democratic Party.
Answer: True
While the text highlights Wilmot's strategic positioning as a Democrat from Pennsylvania who was close to many Southerners, his introduction of the Proviso, alongside other Barnburner Democrats, signaled a move to challenge the expansion of slavery, reflecting a growing sectional divide within the Democratic Party.
The Whig Party's failure to strongly support Texas annexation in 1844 created difficulties in navigating the subsequent slavery debates.
Answer: True
The Whigs' failure to strongly support Texas annexation in the 1844 election surprised Southern Whigs and created difficulties in subsequent years. They recognized that territorial acquisition would inevitably reintroduce the contentious issue of slavery, potentially exposing and exacerbating internal party divisions.
What was the primary objective of the Wilmot Proviso when it was introduced in 1846?
Answer: To prohibit slavery in territories acquired from Mexico.
The Wilmot Proviso was a legislative proposal intended to prohibit the institution of slavery in any territory that the United States might acquire from Mexico as a result of the ongoing Mexican-American War.
Who introduced the Wilmot Proviso, and from which state did he represent?
Answer: Congressman David Wilmot from Pennsylvania.
Congressman David Wilmot of Pennsylvania was responsible for introducing the Wilmot Proviso.
Which foundational document influenced the wording of the Wilmot Proviso?
Answer: The Northwest Ordinance of 1787
The language used in the Wilmot Proviso was modeled after the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, a foundational document that had previously prohibited slavery in territories organized under its authority.
What was the primary reason for Northern opposition to the Mexican-American War, according to the source?
Answer: It was perceived as a Southern effort to expand slave states.
The war was perceived by many in the North as an expansionist effort by the South to gain more territory for the establishment of slave states, leading to widespread opposition in the North, while it was more popular in the South.
Which of the following locations is named in commemoration of the Wilmot Proviso?
Answer: Wilmot, Wisconsin
Proviso Township in Cook County, Illinois, and the town of Wilmot in Wisconsin are named in commemoration of the Wilmot Proviso.
Which territories were most directly impacted by the political debate surrounding the Wilmot Proviso?
Answer: Territories acquired from Mexico, specifically California, Utah, and New Mexico.
The territories most directly affected by the political debate surrounding the Wilmot Proviso were those acquired from Mexico, specifically California, Utah, and New Mexico.
The Wilmot Proviso was first introduced on August 8, 1846, as an amendment to an appropriations bill.
Answer: True
The Wilmot Proviso was first introduced on August 8, 1846, as an amendment, or rider, attached to a $2,000,000 appropriations bill that was intended to facilitate final negotiations to conclude the Mexican-American War.
The initial vote on the Wilmot Proviso in the House of Representatives showed significant division along sectional lines.
Answer: True
The vote in the House of Representatives largely divided along sectional lines, with the predominantly anti-slavery North voting in favor of the Proviso and the pro-slavery South voting against it, foreshadowing future conflicts.
The Wilmot Proviso failed to pass the Senate during its first introduction in August 1846 due to Southern opposition.
Answer: True
The Proviso failed in the Senate because the Southern states, which held greater representation in that chamber, opposed it, thereby preventing its passage.
The Wilmot Proviso was reintroduced in Congress in 1847 and again failed to pass the Senate.
Answer: True
Yes, the Wilmot Proviso was reintroduced in February 1847, passing the House once more but failing again in the Senate. An additional attempt was made in 1848 to incorporate it into the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which also did not succeed.
Senator John Davis attempted a procedural tactic to force a Senate vote on the Proviso-attached bill before adjournment.
Answer: True
To counter the Senate's aim to reject the Proviso, Senator John Davis of Massachusetts attempted to hold the floor until it was too late for the bill to be returned, forcing the Senate to vote on the appropriation with the Proviso intact.
A discrepancy in official clocks between the House and Senate prevented a vote on the Wilmot Proviso bill in August 1846.
Answer: True
A slight discrepancy in the official clocks between the House and Senate resulted in the House adjourning due to the time difference before the Senate could complete its vote on the bill, effectively halting the Proviso's progress for that session.
On what date and in what legislative context was the Wilmot Proviso first presented?
Answer: August 8, 1846, as an amendment to an appropriations bill.
The Wilmot Proviso was first introduced on August 8, 1846, as an amendment, or rider, attached to a $2,000,000 appropriations bill that was intended to facilitate final negotiations to conclude the Mexican-American War.
Why did the Wilmot Proviso fail to pass the Senate during its initial introduction in August 1846?
Answer: Southern states, with greater representation in the Senate, opposed it.
The Proviso failed in the Senate because the Southern states, which held greater representation in that chamber, opposed it, thereby preventing its passage.
How did the sectional voting pattern in the House of Representatives on the Wilmot Proviso reflect the growing divide?
Answer: It divided largely along sectional lines, with the North favoring and the South opposing it.
The vote in the House of Representatives largely divided along sectional lines, with the predominantly anti-slavery North voting in favor of the Proviso and the pro-slavery South voting against it, foreshadowing future conflicts.
Northern Democrats, known as Barnburners, generally supported the Wilmot Proviso's stance against slavery expansion.
Answer: True
The Barnburners were generally aligned with the Wilmot Proviso and opposed to slavery's expansion, while the Hunkers represented the more conservative opposition. This internal party conflict became evident when the Barnburners withdrew from the national Democratic convention after the party rejected a pro-proviso stance and nominated Lewis Cass, subsequently forming the core of the Free Soil Party.
The Barnburner faction's support for the Wilmot Proviso led them to form the core of the Free Soil Party.
Answer: True
The Barnburners, who supported the Proviso, faced opposition from the conservative Hunkers. This internal party conflict led the Barnburners to withdraw from the Democratic National Convention after it rejected a pro-proviso plank and nominated Lewis Cass, subsequently forming the core of the Free Soil Party.
How did the 1848 Democratic National Convention handle the Wilmot Proviso and the Alabama Platform?
Answer: Rejected a pro-Proviso plank, nominated Lewis Cass, and rejected the Alabama Platform.
The convention rejected a plank supporting the Wilmot Proviso and nominated Lewis Cass. While the Barnburners departed, the convention also voted against incorporating the Alabama Platform into the national party platform by a significant margin.
What was the significance of the Barnburner and Hunker factions within the Democratic Party?
Answer: They highlighted internal party divisions over slavery expansion, with Barnburners supporting the Proviso.
The Barnburners were generally aligned with the Wilmot Proviso and opposed to slavery's expansion, while the Hunkers represented the more conservative opposition. This internal party conflict became evident when the Barnburners withdrew from the national Democratic convention after the party rejected a pro-proviso stance and nominated Lewis Cass, subsequently forming the core of the Free Soil Party.
What was the consequence for the Barnburner faction after the 1848 Democratic National Convention rejected a pro-proviso plank?
Answer: They bolted from the convention and formed the core of the Free Soil Party.
The Barnburners, who supported the Proviso, faced opposition from the conservative Hunkers. This internal party conflict led the Barnburners to withdraw from the Democratic National Convention after it rejected a pro-proviso plank and nominated Lewis Cass, subsequently forming the core of the Free Soil Party.
President Polk requested $2,000,000 in August 1846 to facilitate negotiations with Mexico.
Answer: True
President Polk requested $2,000,000 from Congress to be used to facilitate negotiations with Mexico concerning the final settlement of the Mexican-American War.
William W. Wick proposed extending the Missouri Compromise line westward as an alternative to the Wilmot Proviso.
Answer: True
William W. Wick, a Democratic congressman from Indiana, proposed extending the Missouri Compromise line of 36°30' latitude westward to the Pacific Ocean as an alternative to a complete ban on slavery. This proposal was ultimately voted down by a margin of 89 to 54.
Stephen Douglas believed that debates over slavery in territories were premature until territories applied for statehood.
Answer: True
Stephen Douglas argued that discussions about slavery in the territories were premature, and the appropriate time to address the issue was when Congress was in the process of organizing the territory.
Lewis Cass championed the principle of popular sovereignty, allowing territorial residents to decide on slavery.
Answer: True
Lewis Cass championed the principle of popular sovereignty, suggesting that the residents of the territories should have the responsibility to decide the issue of slavery for themselves.
Southern Whigs hoped General Zachary Taylor, a slaveholder and war hero, could unify the country.
Answer: True
Southern Whigs placed their hopes in Zachary Taylor, a slaveholder and war hero, believing he could bridge the widening sectional gap, despite his lack of a public stance on the Wilmot Proviso.
President Taylor proposed admitting California and New Mexico as states to resolve the slavery issue.
Answer: True
Taylor aimed to sidestep the contentious territorial stage by proposing the immediate admission of California and New Mexico as states, thereby freezing slavery at its 1849 boundaries and creating a new non-partisan coalition.
President Taylor recommended admitting California as a free state in his December 1849 message to Congress.
Answer: True
President Taylor recommended that California be admitted to the Union as a free state, which further exacerbated the crisis between the North and the South.
President Taylor's strategy for the Mexican Cession territories involved immediate admission as states, bypassing the territorial stage.
Answer: True
President Taylor sought to bypass the territorial stage entirely by advocating for the immediate admission of California and New Mexico as states. This strategy aimed to circumvent the contentious debate over slavery's status within a territorial government.
What alternative proposal did William W. Wick suggest to address slavery in potential new territories?
Answer: Extending the Missouri Compromise line (36°30') westward.
William W. Wick, a Democratic congressman from Indiana, proposed extending the Missouri Compromise line of 36°30' latitude westward to the Pacific Ocean as an alternative to a complete ban on slavery. This proposal was ultimately voted down by a margin of 89 to 54.
How did Henry David Thoreau protest the Mexican-American War?
Answer: By refusing to pay his poll tax.
Henry David Thoreau protested the war by refusing to pay his poll tax, stating that the money would be used to fund a war aimed at acquiring territory for the expansion of slavery.
Which principle did Lewis Cass champion as a solution to the slavery issue in territories acquired from Mexico?
Answer: Popular sovereignty.
Lewis Cass championed the principle of popular sovereignty, suggesting that the residents of the territories should have the responsibility to decide the issue of slavery for themselves.
What was President Zachary Taylor's strategy to manage the slavery issue in the territories acquired from Mexico?
Answer: He proposed immediate admission of California and New Mexico as states.
Taylor aimed to sidestep the contentious territorial stage by proposing the immediate admission of California and New Mexico as states, thereby freezing slavery at its 1849 boundaries and creating a new non-partisan coalition.
What was Stephen Douglas's argument regarding the timing of debates on slavery in the territories?
Answer: Debates were premature until territories applied for statehood.
Stephen Douglas argued that discussions about slavery in the territories were premature, and the appropriate time to address the issue was when Congress was in the process of organizing the territory.
How did President Taylor's approach to California and New Mexico differ from the Wilmot Proviso?
Answer: Taylor proposed immediate admission as states, bypassing the territorial stage.
Taylor aimed to sidestep the contentious territorial stage by proposing the immediate admission of California and New Mexico as states. This strategy aimed to circumvent the contentious debate over slavery's status within a territorial government.
What was President Taylor's recommendation regarding California in his December 1849 message to Congress?
Answer: Admit it as a free state.
President Taylor recommended that California be admitted to the Union as a free state, which further exacerbated the crisis between the North and the South.
What was the outcome of the vote to extend the Missouri Compromise line in the House in August 1846?
Answer: It was defeated by a significant margin (89 to 54).
The vote to extend the Missouri Compromise line, which was defeated 89-54, represented a failed attempt to find a compromise solution that would have permitted slavery in territories west of the established line, contrasting with the outright prohibition sought by the Wilmot Proviso.
Southern Democrats perceived the Wilmot Proviso as a challenge to their leadership position within the Democratic Party.
Answer: True
Southern Democrats perceived the Proviso as a challenge to their traditional leadership on slavery issues within the party, believing that Northern Democrats should consistently align with the Southern position. The Proviso indicated a shift, with some Northern Democrats no longer willing to follow the Southern lead.
The 'Alabama Platform' demanded federal protection for slavery in all territories and the nullification of Mexican anti-slavery laws.
Answer: True
The Alabama Platform, adopted by the Alabama Democratic convention and endorsed by other Southern states, asserted that the federal government should not impose any restrictions on slavery within the territories and called for federal legislation to override existing Mexican anti-slavery laws in the acquired territories.
Southern rhetoric in 1849 focused on resistance against the North.
Answer: True
Throughout 1849, the rhetoric of resistance against the North intensified and spread across the Southern states, setting the stage for the Nashville Convention scheduled for June 1850.
The Nashville Convention in 1850 did not endorse secession as a necessary response to Northern actions.
Answer: True
The Nashville Convention did not endorse secession, which temporarily sidelined radical secessionist elements as moderates rallied around the Compromise of 1850 as a definitive resolution to sectional disputes over slavery and territories.
The Georgia Platform affirmed the South's conditional adherence to the Union.
Answer: True
The Georgia Platform, widely accepted throughout the South, clearly communicated that the South's adherence to the Union was not unconditional, emphasizing their expectation that the North would uphold its part of the Compromise agreement.
The 'Alabama Platform' opposed federal restrictions on slavery in territories acquired from Mexico.
Answer: True
The Alabama Platform asserted that the federal government should not impose any restrictions on slavery within the territories and called for federal legislation to override existing Mexican anti-slavery laws in the territories acquired from Mexico.
The 'Alabama Platform' primarily advocated for:
Answer: No federal restrictions on slavery and nullification of Mexican anti-slavery laws.
The Alabama Platform asserted that the federal government should not impose any restrictions on slavery within the territories and called for federal legislation to override existing Mexican anti-slavery laws in the territories acquired from Mexico.
What was the significance of the Georgia Platform in the context of the Compromise of 1850?
Answer: It declared the South's adherence to the Union was conditional on the North upholding the Compromise.
The Georgia Platform, widely accepted throughout the South, clearly communicated that the South's adherence to the Union was not unconditional, emphasizing their expectation that the North would uphold its part of the Compromise agreement.
What was the Southern Democratic perspective on the Wilmot Proviso's impact on their party's influence?
Answer: They perceived it as a challenge to their leadership, indicating Northern Democrats were shifting away from Southern influence.
Southern Democrats perceived the Proviso as a challenge to their traditional leadership on slavery issues within the party, believing that Northern Democrats should consistently align with the Southern position. The Proviso indicated a shift, with some Northern Democrats no longer willing to follow the Southern lead.
The introduction of a bill to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia by John G. Palfrey marked a new phase of sectional conflict in December 1848.
Answer: True
The opening salvo in a new level of sectional conflict occurred when John G. Palfrey of Massachusetts introduced a bill proposing the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia.
The Wilmot Proviso was a key factor leading to the Compromise of 1850, which provided a temporary peace but did not resolve the fundamental disputes, which continued to contribute to the Civil War.
Answer: True
Although the Compromise of 1850 temporarily eased sectional tensions, the fundamental disputes over slavery, amplified by the Wilmot Proviso debate, persisted and ultimately contributed to the outbreak of the Civil War a decade later.
California banned slavery in its 1849 constitution prior to its admission as a free state.
Answer: True
California experienced a brief period of slavery due to slave-owning settlers arriving during the Gold Rush. However, slave escapes were common because there were no established slave patrols or laws protecting slavery, and California ultimately banned slavery in its 1849 constitution.
The United States officially banned slavery in all federal territories in 1862.
Answer: True
Slavery was officially banned in all federal territories by the United States in July 1862.
According to the 1860 census, New Mexico reported no slaves.
Answer: True
According to the 1860 census, Utah had only 29 slaves, representing 0.07% of its population, and New Mexico reported no slaves. Slavery was legally prohibited in all federal territories by July 1862.
What was the legal status of slavery in California prior to its admission as a free state in 1850?
Answer: Slavery was banned by California's constitution in 1849.
California banned slavery in its 1849 constitution. While slave escapes were common due to lack of legal protection, the constitution itself prohibited the institution.
In what year did the United States officially ban slavery in all of its federal territories?
Answer: 1862
Slavery was officially banned in all federal territories by the United States in July 1862.
How did the Compromise of 1850 ultimately affect the sectional disputes over slavery?
Answer: It provided a temporary peace but did not resolve the fundamental disputes, which continued to contribute to the Civil War.
Although the Compromise of 1850 temporarily eased sectional tensions, the fundamental disputes over slavery, amplified by the Wilmot Proviso debate, persisted and ultimately contributed to the outbreak of the Civil War a decade later.
How did the Wilmot Proviso contribute to the escalating tensions leading to the Civil War?
Answer: It became a major point of contention over slavery in new territories, foreshadowing the Civil War.
The Proviso became a major point of contention between the Northern and Southern states regarding the expansion of slavery into newly acquired territories, marking it as one of the significant events that foreshadowed the American Civil War.