The Free Soil Party, which was active in the United States from 1848 to 1854, would have supported the Wilmot Proviso and opposed the Fugitive Slave Act.
The Wilmot Proviso, introduced by Representative David Wilmot in 1846, proposed that any territory acquired from Mexico as a result of the Mexican-American War should be free of slavery. The Free Soil Party strongly supported this proviso, as they wanted to prevent the spread of slavery into new territories.
On the other hand, the Free Soil Party would have vehemently opposed the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850. This act mandated the return of escaped slaves to their owners, even in free states. The Free Soil Party was fundamentally against the expansion of slavery and the enforcement of laws that supported the institution. Therefore, they would have actively opposed the Fugitive Slave Act.
The Cottonocracy refers to the wealthy class of Southern plantation owners who profited greatly from the cotton industry and the institution of slavery. As a party opposed to the expansion of slavery, the Free Soil Party would not have supported the interests of the Cottonocracy.
Slave codes were laws in various Southern states that defined and regulated the institution of slavery, addressing issues such as labor, punishment, and control over enslaved individuals. The Free Soil Party would have been fundamentally opposed to slave codes and the institution of slavery itself, as they aimed to limit the expansion of slavery into new territories.
Which of the following laws would the free soil party have supported? Cottonocracy, slave codes, Wilmot Proviso, Fugitive Slave Act
1 answer