need one paragraph explainging why popular sovereignty caused tension between north and south on history?

Question

make one paragraph explainging why popular sovereignty caused tension between north and south for history or soical studies

Answer 1

Since the previous answer was not one paragraph I will follow your directions and give you one paragraph:

Popular sovereignty was first developed by Lewis B. Cass and later popularized by Stephen A. Douglas in an attempt to allow local voices control their fate concerning slavery. In territories like Kansas and Nebrask local voters were given the shance in 1856 to choose for themselves if they wanted to include or ban slavery from within their borders and the resulting vote led to Bleeding Kansas. Border ruffians from neighboring states crossed the statelines illegally and attempted to sway the election in their favor by voting in local elections. When the issoe of slavery was left up to the locals warfare and bloodshed sadly were often the result.

Answer 2

A Shrewd Deal: The Political Tension and Social Reactions to the Compromise of 1850

The Compromise of 1850 was a significant piece of legislation for antebellum politics, and the Civil War that was soon to follow. The drafting of the Compromise of 1850 and the Civil War have been attributed to basic political differences found between the antebellum North and South. These two regions did have divergent political views; however, social reactions and differences led to feelings of alienation among both the North and the South that would later lead to war. While examining the Compromise and the social reactions it caused, the Civil War can be placed in its correct context. The Compromise caused a decline in public confidence in the political system as well as the political parties. The Compromise of 1850 did change the path of American politics and heightened the tension over slavery; however, it was not solely the political ramifications of the Compromise that caused the Civil War but also the mutual social resentment it caused.

The latter part of the 1840's saw political tension develop because the sectional balance between North and South was threatened. California was booming and was ready to become a state in the Union. Texas, a slave holding state, was claiming a huge portion of the Mexican Cession. Southerners were upset with the amount of slaves escaping bondage and finding safety in the north. Finally, Northerners thought it was necessary to eliminate slavery and the slave trade in Washington DC. The sectional balance between free soil and slave-states was the political motivation behind a possible compromise to preserve the Union. The nation called once more for the Great Compromiser, Henry Clay, but also viewed political upstarts like Stephen A. Douglas working to keep the Union intact. The Whigs and Democrats, with minor influences from the Free-Soilers, built a compromise to try and appease both sides. First, California was added as a free state much to the delight of the majority of inhabitants who had voted against slavery when drafting the state constitution (Jacobs 5). The Texas issue was settled in two parts: 1) the territory in question was divided into New Mexico and Utah, and slavery was determined by means of popular sovereignty, and 2) Texas was awarded $10 million. The Northern politicians agreed to a more stringent Fugitive Slave Law to pacify Southern discontent. The Washington DC question was settled with the elimination of the slave trade, but not slavery itself. Though this was supposedly a compromise "it seemed the South had sealed its own subordination and legalized its own defeat"